Lots to Applaud in the Alberta Land Use Framework

The Alberta Land Use Framework is one of the most important and eagerly anticipated public policy initiatives in Alberta in a long time. OK maybe saying it has been eagerly anticipated is a stretch for most Albertans but it is true for those of us who live in the public policy and political world.

I was involved in the early stages of the process and even had a small hand in some of the process design and participated in some of the stakeholder consultations and workshops and did some briefings for senior officials on the outcomes of the discrete choice modeling values based research we did on forestry stewardship and oil sands development. That involvement adds to my sense of anticipation obviously. I have not had the time to read the document in detail but let me share some initial impressions.

IT IS ALL ABOUT MANAGING GROWTH:

This document is a thoughtful response to growth pressures in Alberta. Don’t be naïve. It will have an impact on the pace of growth and even the purpose and place of growth in some instances. It is going to be an effective “touching of the brakes.” Be careful how you interpret that comment. Touching the brakes tends to slow things down. You have to “hit the brakes” to stop things. This is not about hitting the brakes but it is definitely going to have the effect of touching them. This slowing down of the pace of growth will give us time to get growth right instead of rapid as has been the case so far.

A QUALITY EXAMPLE OF PUBLIC POLICY DEVELOPMENT:

This document has been a long time coming and for good reason. It is the result of a comprehensive and intensive series of explorations and consultations and activist citizen engagement. It is the product of an intelligent policy design process. The last time complex and intricate policy was developed in such a positive way was the Water for Life Strategy. That policy was left unfunded so it has not lived up to its promise – at least not yet but I am hopeful that will change as it integrates with the Land Use Framework policy.

TYING LAND USE TO WATER CAPACITY IS BRILLIANT:

The brilliant move in the Land Use Framework is tying land use to water use as the defining element in regional planning. If the water capacity can’t sustain a land use development – it should not happen. There limits to our ecological capacity for growth that are atmospheric (GHG) water and land use. There is a focus on cumulative impacts now and not each project being looked at on its own “merits.” The integration of land, air and water, with cumulative impacts, consideration of habitat, fragmentation, urban sprawl and a host of other growth pressure elements will all come into play now. This means there will not be a one-size-to-fit-all approach going forward. More design intelligence is obviously at work here in this document.

WE HAVE TO DO BETTER IN CONSERVATOIN AND STEWARDSHIP:

This auger well for us now avoiding turning the entire province in to the same mess we created in Fort McMurray caused by delays and the disasters due to the personal political agendas of incompetent and neglectful former key Ministers who are no longer around.

The other really reassuring strategy in the Land Use Framework is the commitment to develop a conservation and stewardship ethos on public and private lands. This issue, especially around preserving and protecting wildlife habitat has shown up as top of mind for Albertans in our research but had not registered in the political agendas of the province – until now.

Congratulations Dr. Morton for making these policy considerations central to our land use ethic going forward.

There is a lot more meat in this document and policy process that I will have to read and reflect on before I comment further. I see this as a great day for Alberta with the release of this draft. It impacts every one of us and ought to be as catalytic for public engagement as the Hunter Royalty Review Panel document was last fall. Now the real work begins!

Here is the link to the website that every Albertan needs to get into and get serious about helping decide where we all go forward on this transformation policy proposal.

More Provinces Are Pushing For Limits to Free Speech

The political trends towards gag laws in Canada are getting serious as more jurisdictions are getting into the action.

The Globe and Mail editorial today of B.S.(not a typo) Premier Campbell “change of heart” on the issue is worth a read.

Then visit Preston Manning’s Op-Ed on the NDP government getting into the limits on free speech bandwagon.

These are political efforts that are missing the point and trying to make their own “communications” job easier by monopolizing the messaging market. We need good governance and that relies on a diversity of opinions promulgated in a variety of ways to anyone who wants to participate in the deomcratic process.

If these old-school stlye of communications constraints survive and become government policy in Alberta, B.C. and Manitoba the Internet will become even more powerful as a source for political and policy information for people. That is not a bad thing. It will show these promoters of political limits on free speech just how wrong they are when the blogosphere and Web 2.0 takes them on and deals with them in the court of public opinion.

The challenge for modern political parties is not to put limits on the free speech of others but to do a better job of communicating their own policies and platforms to citizens in the first place. The opportnities for politicians to connect and communicate with citizens directly has never been easier or cheaper with the ubiquity and accessibility of the Internet.

Get in the new game guys and compete for attention and for credibility of voters in the open market of ideas instead of using your legislative power to rig the rules of the old game in your favour and stifling the free speech of others in the process.

BC Government Limits Free Speech - Shame!

Looks like the BC government has already legislated limitations on free speech at election time.

There are similar musings in Alberta to do something akin to this limitation on third party advertising at election time. Not good.

People are not stupid. They can make informed judgments. In the Internet age limiting third party advertising in elections is a silly and ineffective “solution” that abuses power and adds to political cynicism.

In a time when everyone is potentially a publisher, limits on traditional advertising for third parties is only going to extend and expand the other more effective media like You Tube, the Blogosphere and social networks. Limits like this will only make the "perceived problem" caused by third-party advertising worse. The networking power of the world wide web is enormously more powerful at informing and influencing public opinion and changing voter behaviours than a billboard or brochure will ever be.

Free speech is not free. It must be protected, promoted and used responsibly. That duty to ensure freedom of speech falls on governments and every freedom loving citizen. Premier Campbell's limitiation on freedom of speech in BC is wrong headed and this law needs to be repealed.

Will Bernier to Get the Boot in a Cabinet Shuffle?

The Hill Times is running a front page story this week speculating that Maxime Bernier will be shuffled and demoted due to his poor judgment concerning his biker girlfriend. I suggested in an earlier post that it was time for a Cabinet shuffle. Looks like Harper is considering it at least.

Sources tell me Bernier actually noted in certain documents calling his former biker girlfriend his “spouse” so she could travel internationally with him on the taxpayer’s dime. A classy guy – all the way.

Stephen Harper - THE Small Man of Confederation.

Read this Canada Press story about Mr. Stephen Harper, your Prime Minister and mine, not attending the portrait hanging in the House of Commons recognition of former Prime Minister Joe Clark.

Next ask yourself; couldn’t events and times be changed to enable the current Prime Minister to be there and avoid even appearance of a slight? Even delaying the House of Commons ceremony to accommodate the Prime Minister Harper’s schedule should be simple enough to arrange.

Let face it, the Prime Minister of Canada does not want to be there…for pure and simple personal and political reasons. Too bad Steve. Showing respect is part of the job description of the Prime Minister of Canada.

Canadians indicate in poll results that they are unsure if they like Stephen Harper as a person. Surely this rudeness and slight underscores a personal character flaw in Mr. Harper as a person. This incident is a minor issue in the more complex context of running the country, but it serves as example of the kind of man Stephen Harper is. It makes you think about just how worthy Stephen Harper is, as a person, to serve and represent us in this most powerful and important office in our country.

As for me, I think such incidences of political and personal pique ought to resolve any disquiet in the minds of Canadians about how Stephen Harper ought to be perceived. We have seen him perform as a bully and as a miscreant and as an obfuscator. And now we see just how small minded and petty he can be. Stephen Harper has proven himself not to be a leader and he did not have to spend millions of partisan advertising dollars to substantiate that fact for us.

The Harper Cons have gleefully accused Premier Dalton McGuinty of Ontario of being a “small man of Confederation.” Prime Minister Harper’s actions here, and there are others, make him look absolutely diminutive as a man. We ought view this event as an opportunity to question if Stephen Harper has the qualities of leadership and the qualities of character to serve the Confederation and Canadians well enough.

Elections Should Be About More Free Speech - Not Less!

If you have some time to reflect on your right of freedom of speech today – and who amongst doesn’t have that topic as top of mind on a long holiday weekend ;~)…read Mark Milke’s piece in the Calgary Herald today.

I agree with him and tried to say so in an earlier blog post. I think it is a mistake to limit third party advertising in election campaigns. Instead I think those who engage in such freedom of speech activities have a duty to be open, transparent and accountable for their actions.

The reforms I suggest are, first, don’t let such proselytizers hide behind screens like “Albertans for Change” when they are in fact the Building Trades Council and the Alberta Federation of Labour. The sponsors of the messages have to state clearly and precisely who they are.

Next we need to consider if they should be registered under the new Lobbying legislation if they undertake such activities in election times. This new law is coming to Alberta eventually. Why does it take so long to draft the regulations and proclaim this Act anyway Mr. Premier?

And lastly perhaps the sponsors should be required to file, in advance with Elections Alberta, a budget indicating what they intend to spend, where and when in such campaigns and this information should be public. I am not so sure on this last thought but the information would help Albertans judge if some special interest group was trying to buy our attention with advertising instead of persuading us based on the merits of their positions.

Political advertising is very effective in the States but not as embedded nor as effective in the Canadian political culture. Americans seem to think the more something is advertised the better it must be. Canadians think if you have to heavily advertise something, there must something inherently wrong with it. My belief is that paid political advertising has a place but it is not the way to win elections. Paid political advertising at the party level is essentially the price you have to pay for being boring or irrelevant. It gets attention but it is not very effective at influencing opinion and is will not ensure the voter behaviour ou want either.

Word of mouth is much more effective in gathering real political support that actually shows up and votes. That is still best done by old fashioned door knocking and face time with citizens. The next most effective way is Word of Mouse. That is an emerging technique using the connective power of the Internet and viral potential of social networking for electronic “door knocking.”

Alberta's Bold Move on Health Care Governance

The decisive move yesterday by the Stelmach government to preemptively eliminate the regional health authorities was a bold move. Others may see it as brash…not me!

I think this elimination of regional governance in health care has been coming for quite some time. It may be the health area is the proving ground for a new governance philosophy in Alberta. A taskforce looked at the governance of all agencies boards and commission a while ago and made some important and strong reform recommendations. The thrust of the findings was these groups together spend about half the provincial budget and the government better ensure they align with the GOA Business Plans and goals.

Apparently a rookie MLA asked Caucus who his constituents would call if they had a complaint about health services. Other MLAs answered in chorus “YOU!” Right on! That is exactly who citizens should be talking to if their government funded facilities and services are not meeting needs. It is government who has to resolve these issues and the provincial politicians have to have first hand information if they are going to understand and appreciate the situation.

The way I see it the beginning of the end of Health Authorities started with the fiasco around instrument sterilization in St. Joseph’s hospital in Vegreville, the Premier’s riding. Then Health Minister Dave Hancock “accepted the resignations” of the board of the authority and then he put his Deputy Minister in charge of running the hospital and the region on an interim basis. The problems were clean up, people were screened for possible infections and the entire region was reviewed from an operational perspective.

The chronic incapacity of the Calgary Health Authority to live within its budget and for them to perpetually press the government for bail out money worked under Klein but not anymore. Then the media stunt about money designed to embarrass the Premier over immediate demands for emergency cash was the last straw. I believe the fate of any continuation of the Klein era regional governance and management model in the health sector was sealed.

My observation is that some of these boards, not just in health, were formed in debt and deficit era to save money, take power from bureaucrats and to be more representative of local needs. They were political appointees but power devolved to the administration and the boards became buffers between the politicians and citizens. Not a sustainable democratic governance philosophy.

There are services government is obligated to provide to citizens. The Alberta government set up various regional authorities with appointed boards and then delegated its public interest obligation to them. Government’s obligation to provide services in areas like social services, children’s services, persons with developmental disabilities are other some examples of a delegated ( some say abdicated) governance philosophy.

It would not be surprising if some of these government responsibilities were re-centralized again. The provincial board in the persons with disabilities area was abolished a couple of years ago but the regional boards remained. There is a government level review now over service needs in the developmentally disable sector – not just nice to haves. Expect a report in June.

Insufficient public funding of community-based agencies in the developmentally disability sector has made it impossible for them to recruit and retain qualified staff. It would not surprise me if a recentralization into government happened in this sector too.

These regional boards may disappear overnight like the Health Authorities. The government may move to direct service delivery and contract with community based provider agencies – or even absorb them back into government over time too? There are arguments both ways but unless there is enough funding to compensate staff to provide services the governing philosophy is moot. The government will be inheriting much of the responsibility as service providers revise downwards the program offerings to pay staff at government rates to fit the budgets provided. Some others may close down altogether leaving the government to create needed services internally.

All we can do now is stay attuned to the happenings in the legislature.

Americans Realize Polar Bears are Threatened!

So the Americans find the Polar bear to be under stress and just listed them as a threatened species. Can Canada be far behind?

The decision according to U.S. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne is said to be based on science. The science is clear, he says. "Today's decision is based on three scientific findings," he said. "First, sea ice is vital to polar bear survival. Second, the polar bear's sea ice habitat has melted in recent decades. Third, computer models suggest sea ice is likely to recede in the future."

Does anyone still not believe that climate change is happening?

UPDATE: GO TO THE WWF WEBSITE FOR MORE INFO AND CONTEXT. http://wwf.ca/polarbears/home.html

More Dead Ducks - This Time it is Saskatchewan's Turn

Here we go again. More dead ducks found in a “waste retention site” in Saskatchewan this time. The operator advised the Saskatchewan government immediately – not eventually and they have jumped to the pump to respond and co-operate.

The Saskatchewan Minister of Energy and Resources announced an immediate investigation. Is the irony lost on anyone that this death of 53 ducks happened on “International Migratory Bird Day?” Lots of talk about prevention and mitigation – yes that word ensure against this ever happening again.

Saskatchewan was very clear that they had learned from Alberta’s mistakes as they moved into economic boom mode too. Habitat is a major value of Albertans and I expect the folks of Saskatchewan feel the same way. I love this quote:

"Hopefully, Saskatchewan is a lot smarter than Alberta when it comes to this development. When the oil and gas runs out we don't want to be left with a toxic wasteland."

Ouch! So far not so good Mr. Minister.

Fort McMurray Folks Feeling Fragile.

A friend of mine was in Fort McMurray yesterday and sent me this picture. It was taken at the Fellowship Baptist Church on Franklin Avenue – the main street in Fort McMurray.

The death of the ducks in the Syncrude tailings pond reverberated around the world so it is not surprising that the good folk in Ft Mac are feeling a bit fragile these days.

At least the are not ducking the issue...or are they ;~)

Courts Reject Imperial's Kearl Lake Oil Sands Project!

Astonishing!!!

The Federal Court has just dismissed Imperial Oils bid to quash a previous regulatory decision that cancelled the 100,000 barrels per day Kearl Lake oil sands project. The original project permit rejection was because of an inadequate environmental reporting on air quality implications from greenhouse gas emissions.

The review panel did not take the project’s GHG emissions that are equivalent to 800,000 passenger vehicles as being of any significance. A Judge disagreed and said the review panel made an error of law and sent the matter back to the panel to do its job right.

The federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans then advised Imperial the project permit was a nullity and they could not proceed with the project. Imperial challenged the federal position and today the lost that challenge.

A corporate spokesman speculates the project may be delayed for up to a year as they comply with the process that is in place.

The Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development and Sierra Club of Canada took the lead on challenging the project approvals and sought to quash them through the courts - and they won! Good job! The courts have made it pretty clear that “…we need a higher standard associated with environmental assessment of oil-sands projects” according to Simon Dyer, Pembina’s director of oil sands.

The world of oil sands development just changed - and for the good again. First 500 ducks die in a tailings pond and the world notices. Now the environmental standards for project approvals are subject to a real rigour and not just an old style and clubby de rigueur standard of care.

Great day for the future of Alberta’s ecological integrity! This decision is a wake-up call for industry and the regulators to be more circumspect in approvals for oil sands development.

Humans Cause 40% of Wildfires

Highlights From the Legislature:
Tidbits from Hansard:
Monday May 12, 2008

The following question and answer yesterday was interesting considering the human cost of wildfires in Alberta. Worth noting is 40% of wildfires are caused by human activity. The fire that recently threatened Kelowna was caused by a guy throwing a lit cigarette out of his vehicle.

Mr. Xiao: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My next question is to the
Minister of Sustainable Resource Development. Fire safety is a
concern for the summer months, whether you are at home or on a
vacation in the great Canadian outdoors. With the May long
weekend rapidly approaching, can the minister explain what this
government is doing to minimize the human cost of wildfires in
Alberta that can threaten towns and our communities?

Dr. Morton: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for that important
question. With the May long weekend approaching – you’re
absolutely right – prevention of wildfires is a high priority. Forty
per cent of all the forest fires in Alberta have a human cause. Our
department, Sustainable Resource Development, has developed a
group of educational materials called FireSmart. They’re available
on our website. They’re for cottages, homes, and also campers.
They’re also on the new respect the land web page that we’ve talked
about before, and also they’ll be handed out by our staff at the
various entrances to parks and campgrounds this long weekend.

Good question! Is the FireSmart education program enough? Is it time to consider a smoking ban while driving through our forests and in our provincial campgrounds and National Parks? With a summer drought, high temperatures and the growing impact of climate change like the Mountain Pine Beetle infestation dry and dead trees are going to be a tinderbox.

Who is Responsible for Land Reclamation in Alberta?

Reclamation is an emerging hot topic in the minds of Albertans according to the Cambridge Strategies Inc Discrete Choice Modeling survey on oil sands development. We have unnecessary seismic lines, old oil and gas and forestry roads, abandoned well sites, pipeline disturbance all over the province that could be reclaimed. We have the open pit oil sands disturbances including tailing ponds and the really big oil sands show is the in-situ development where 70% of future oil sands activity is going to take place.

The question on my mind is if reclamation an afterthought in the consciousness industry and policy makers in Alberta? If so how long can this go on and who is ultimately responsible to pay for reclamation in the end? The old conventional industry game was for reclamation responsibility to be with the original developing oil company. The big guys, who do the really big plays, take on the reclamation responsibility at the front end. As the production diminishes the wells get sold off to juniors and smaller players who further exploit the wells and assume the reclamation duties. As the wells get really inefficient they get sold off to smaller and smaller groups who can use shell companies to pick up the dwindling production wells.

Then these micro players bankrupt the shell companies and leave the reclamation obligations unfulfilled. Not good. As I understand it the reasonability for reclamation can be enforced up the chain of ownership to the original players. If that is the case how often is that enforced by the government? If not, why not?

Another “disturbing” point about reclamation is the requirements to return the lands to a useful purpose akin to the original one would hope. Conventional site reclamations only require the l companies to plant grass…not even replace the trees they took out. In the early days of open pit oil sands mining the operators just stripped off the “overburden” and piled it up. One man’s overburden is another man’s topsoil and trees. Other species with whom we share the overburden lands call them home. How is it possible to replace the topsoil and the surface organic material that will sustain a forest growth if it is all mixed up in a pile? If this is what has happened one has to ask can the legal responsibility of developers to reclaim open pit oil sands mines ever be met with such operational practices?

The regulators have recently changed this and the Shell Albion project has actually for the first time separated the overburden into different piles so there is at least a chance it can be returned in some form so future efforts at reclamation may have a chance of supporting growth.

We better start looking seriously at responsibilities for reclamation now. We can’t wait any longer to get our heads around this problem. I am hoping we see something significant about reclamation in the soon to be released Land Use Framework of the GOA.

Short sighted development that is not integrated and enlightened cannot be the default position of Alberta. Albertans know this and it is time for our government to catch up to this reality and get aggressive about enforcing reclamation obligations.

Alberta Election Reform Should Not Limit Free Speech

The existential anxiety I feel when I agree with Lorne Gunter amuses and alarms me. His column today goes beyond my usual cognitive dissonance. It actually astonishes me because I can’t even find a quibble with what he says - never mind any significant disagreement with him.

The election reform we need to restore citizenship and participation in Alberta’s democratic process is not going to be achieved by putting a limitation on free speech. The contest of how to correct the system so far sees Stelmach’s trial balloon of limiting third party election spending and the Alberta Federation of Labour’s counter punch of demanding big business donation bucks are taken out of politics too.

The story line is there is too much political muscle vested in special interests like labour and business. Those big money guys are the problem. Why? Because they can buy influence via paid advertising in the election process. I don’t buy that. I also don’t buy that political parties should be the only serious players in politics at election time. If any group has too much power over the process it is the political parties, not business and labour.

The problem with our lack of political engagement in our democracy is not about who has and is exercising monetary muscle. It is more about that what is being said at elections. What problems being presented in platforms. What solutions are being offered by the political class. For the most part the content and context of elections are not meaningful to the population.

Political parties try not to lose elections rather than win them. They play super safe by doing pointless polls, run obtuse focus groups, then media train the personality out of the leaders by shrink-wrapping them into a message bubble so they will be politically safe. Elections are supposed to be about choices and consequences. Instead of making election politics about practical purposes and people they become personality contests focused on tactics, gaffes and shallow media events.

There are some changes that need to be made in the election process that deals more with openness and transparency of who exactly is trying to buy influence over me. People who show up and think about the issues and how to cast their vote are not stupid. Those who don’t bother to get informed or to vote effectively abdicate their democratic rights to those who do vote. As a result the no-shows have made a decision that they don’t want to count in the future political direction and decisions that impact their lives. So be it but paid advertising is not likely to change the opinions much less the behaviours of the pathologically disengaged “citizen.”

The solution for that democratic dilemma is not the elimination of third party advertising or abolition of certain financial support sources for elections. I would be trying to expand both elements and also be encouraging individual donations and citizen political participation as a way to get political parties and leaders to become more open to new ideas.

We need more candidates who are able to be bolder, braver and come forward with more engaging and meaningful policy promises. they need to be able to clearly articulate a relevant practical political platforms they intend to keep. I think if there is going to be a focus on election reform, it is not so much about how free speech is being exercised but to ensure we know who exactly is “talking” to us to influence our vote.

The AFL gambit of not disclosing that they were behind the anti-Stelmach TV ads hurt the NDP who could have used the money. It also hurt the Liberals who got caught in a backlash because they were presumed to be the source of the ads and they got blamed because for many Albertans they were seen to be in bad taste and too negative. The irony is, as Gunter points out, that while Stelmach may be trying to limit such ads, he actually benefited significantly from the AFL negative TV ads at the end of the day.

There is some positive, serious and significant election reform going that will not likely get front page headlines because it is not deemed to be newsworthy. It is the recent Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta effort to amend and fix its own leadership selection process. It is one of the most open and democratic processes in the country today but still needs improvement. I suggest this effort is a more important and meaningful step at significant political reform.

The Alberta Liberals and NDP are poised for leadership changes as well. They might we well advised to look at their own party processes and shortcomings before they jump into any exercise or bandwagon to limit free speech masquerading in the guise of enhancing our democracy.

Minister's Biker Girlfriend is Not a Security Risk

Let me get this straight. The Minister of Foreign Affairs (sic) has a girlfriend who was married to a well known and convicted mobster and formerly in a relationship with another who was killed before he got to trial. This is a private matter and “none of our business” and not a security risk according to the Prime Minister.


Our government does not know where 41000 at large deportees are and they presume they left Canada when we rejected them status and because they must be honourable folks.

Now tell me again just who is not a leader?

Politicians who are that naive, lack a modicum of judgment and are self-delusional are not fit to govern.

Western Canadians - Including Albertans - Are Moving to the Center.

I really appreciate the good work the Canada West Foundation does. The recent study from the CWF provides proves my admiration is well founded as they provide more clarity as to the direction western Canadians want to go on some 15 public policy issue they studied.

The findings are very interesting and show a shift in public consciousness squarely toward the social infrastructure deficit and looking for a more activist government to invest qualitatively in the future prosperity in a knowledge economy.

The most significant finding is the consistency on the top public policy issues for all four western provinces. We all agree across the west that the top three public policy issues being improving health care (77.2%) doing more to protect the environment (74.9%) and doing more to reduce poverty (71.7%). These findings are consistent with a conjoint research project we did in the fall of 2006 during the Progressive Conservative leadership campaign.

The growing public concern over dealing with poverty issues surprised most people back then. The greater concern for Aboriginal social issues (44.3%) and creating employment opportunities for Aboriginal people (43.9%) over attracting skilled workers from other countries (31.3%) is illustrating a shift the social infrastructure deficit as a critical issue as well.

Alberta and BC align on the next priority of issues with concerns about investments in post-secondary education (61.9%), transportation and infrastructure (58.1%) plus science and technology (57.1%) are ranked as more important than lowering personal income taxes (55.1%). Expect TILMA to assist in this regard.

Westerners are all still big on the free market economy with 6 out of 10 wanting government to stay out of the economy but still 78.8% of us want government to protect rural economies. There is enormous support for activist government in using tax incentives for supporting resource industry, science and technology and increasing R&D funding as well as putting money into universities for hiring top researchers. Albertans are at the very top of the push in these areas. Ironic really, given that the previous government’s mantra of “government on being in the business of being in business.”

There are some storm clouds indicated about acceptability of high levels of foreign investment. Only 49.2% support and 46.7% oppose this trend and the highest support is not from Alberta but recognize the differences between provinces are not statistically significant. Times are good in Alberta and the west generally. This all may change if the economy changes dramatically.

CWF’s concluding remarks really nails the essence of the research when they say “ Western Canadians’ top public policy priorities are decidedly non-economic: while addressing issues of health care, the environment, poverty and greenhouse gas emissions may have economic dimensions, they are not economic policy areas.” They go on to note “…there are a wide range of areas in which western Canadians are supportive of government action and intervention.”

Squaring this circle of free enterprisers and activitist government is done by the CWF who point out only 2 of 10 strongly agree for government to stay out of the free market, at least “…suggesting that almost 8 in 10 are open to government economic intervention in selected areas.”

Westerners, including Albertans, have moved on from the past harsh economic policies and the far right political focus of reducing government capacity to simply lower taxes. The new Stelmach government clearly has a sense of this and is adjusting accordingly. Lots to do and fiscal prudence is still the overarching principle but we need to do more for those less able to help themselves in the brave new world of western Canada.

Why Are Alberta Opposition Parties Blaming Voters the Election Results?

The talk of a new political party or the merger of the Alberta Liberal and the NDP in response to the recent Stelmach Progressive Conservative landslide majority is interesting but if it is reactive it will not get any momentum.

The gnashing of Liberal and NDP teeth after the last election results was more like they were blaming Alberta voters for electing the Stelmach versions of a Progressive Conservative government. They bemoaned that 20% of total of eligible Albertans selected the Stelmach government. Stelmach actually got over 50% of the 41% of eligible voters who bothered to show up on election day.

The Alberta results could also be legitimately framed that the majority of voting Albertans selected Stelmach and it is worth noting only two political parties showed an increase in their popular vote, the Progressive Conservative and the Green Party of Alberta. The rejection of the Alberta Liberals and the NDP means they need to look at themselves instead of blaming the voter or the apathetic Alberta for the performance of their parties in these election results.

Still the opposition parties and vested interest groups wailed and moaned that these election results were unacceptable and somehow undemocratic and the low participation actually diminished the PC mandate. That is utter nonsense.

That kind of reaction from the losers was just insulting the Albertans who had considered the options, made a decision on who to vote for and then took the time to show up and vote. Those engaged Albertan made their preferences known about who they wanted to grant consent to govern the province. It was not the Alberta Liberals or the NDP. The right to vote is a moral duty and not a legal obligation. Enough said!

That said, there is still a problem that threatens our democracy when only 41% of the population could be bothered to vote in the first place. That is not going to be solved by blaming the voter or arranging a shotgun marriage of the Alberta Liberal and the NDP. Even worse is the “solution” of some who are calling a strategic machination to reduce the democratic choices for Alberta voters. This is the end result of the proposal that the Alberta Liberals and NDP collude and not run candidates against each other in certain close ridings to avoid splitting votes.

Instead the oppositions parties ought to be look at ways they can offer Albertan’s a better government through better leadership, better candidates and more resonate platforms. Tinkering with the system with schemes like Proportional Representation is another folly of political parties who just can’t cut it with the electorate.

We need a strong opposition. They help make government better, more accountable and more effective and can provide voters with choices and alternatives. That is the job of the opposition and they need to get on with it. They should quit trying to change the rules and stop blaming voters or apathy for their own shortcoming. More opposition members is an obvious “solution” but remember the four-man NDP Caucus last session was pretty damn effective by all counts.

Reality is when Albertans what more opposition member it will elect them. In the meantime opposition parties should refocus and get serious about being an effective opposition and an acceptable alternative for Albertans if they ever want to govern us. So far they look like they just want to whine about not getting political power.

Syncrude Apologizes - Alberta Investigates - Albertans Expect More

The media’s, special interest groups and citizens mistrust of authority and power is showing itself in follow up coverage on the ducks on toxic ponds stories. The apology advertising by Syncrude in major newspapers over the weekend is not a request for absolution but an acknowledgement of culpability and an undertaking to do better.

The front page newspaper coverage on the weekend shows that the newsworthiness of an acknowledgement by Premier Stelmach that the apology will not stop the probe and investigation. Stelmach is quoted as saying he appreciates the apology “but done not necessarily accept it.” He has promised to ensure “…once the investigation is complete it will be shared with Albertans.”

The ENGO quotes in these stories are casting more doubts on the oil sands companies “management of their waste products” emerging from the “On Tailings Pond” incident is more proof of this endemic mistrust.

Syncrude is promising to do better. Alberta’s international image is tarnished. The linking of Alberta’s claim of “Mission Accomplished” to Washington DC legislators about the ecological integrity of our oil sands to Bush’s similar claim a couple of years ago about Iraq is more collateral damage.

Syncrude is still looking for distressed ducks and have sent three more to Edmonton for care. Of the original five ducks rescued only one has survived and indications are the next three are in better shape and early indications all of them will survive.

Now ConnoPhillips has reported that eight migratory birds had settled on a pond at its Surmount oil sands project and one loon was found dead, although the cause was unclear but they are quoted as “taking this very seriously.” I would not be surprised to see more such admissions from other sources in the near future.

The most important comment made by Syncrude and the Premier on this situation to date was that both parties are working to “ensure” that it does not happen again. Syncrude’s ad said: “We understand you expect the best from Syncrude in environmental management and the protection of wildlife. It’s a value that we share, and we are committed to making the necessary changes opt our long-established practices to help ensure a sad event like this never happens again.”

This is all further acknowledgement of the new expectation levels of the public for ensurance on not just insurance or assurance has been noted in the blog before. There is nothing totally ensurable so that prevention is 100% effective in the world today. But without assuming a higher standard of ecological care we will merely continue to degrade and destroy the environment for the sake of growth and artificial short-sighted “wealth creation.”

This lack of an integrated and long-term approach that respects the social and biological ecology as an integral part of resource development is an unacceptable state of affairs to any thinking Albertan. We citizen/owners/voters have to stay engaged if this is going to really happen.

Looks Like Albertan's Are Back to Being "Blue-Eyed Arabs"

I find gems every now and then in Hansard. Most of my readers have lives and do not spend a lot of time on the detailed happenings in the Legislature, I do for professional reasons and often come across these gems. I will share them from time to time.

One that struck me was Kevin Taft's speech in reply to the Budget. He puts the petroleum wealth of Alberta in terms of how much there is for each Albertan. Our total reserves may be second to Saudi Arabia, which I would dispute - the Saudi's have not really updated reserve estimates for decades. Kevin Taft put reserve comparisons in per capita terms. Here is an excerpt from his speech on April 23rd:

Dr. Kevin Taft Alberta Liberal Leader - MLA Edmonton Riverview
"Alberta’s petroleum riches are even more impressive when measured against Alberta’s small population; on a per capita basis Alberta has 51,900 barrels of recoverable oil reserves, tops in the world. In other words, for our small population, per capita we have the largest oil reserves
in the world. Second is Kuwait, then the United Arab Emirates, and then Qatar. Saudi Arabia, which we always assume is incredibly wealthy in petroleum, actually ranks fifth on a list of petroleum wealth per capita. Alberta ranks first."

"I think that’s something we should all remember when we’re weighing out how we manage this
wealth. Now, that’s just oil reserves. If you add in natural gas reserves, our wealth rises even higher. Natural gas reserves are almost 57 trillion cubic feet, and there’s perhaps another 500 trillion cubic feet of coal-bed methane. So we have here staggering wealth."

Iris Evans in a recent speech to the Edmonton Glenora and Riverview PC party faithful noted this "managing our future, savings and long term investment policy" is going to be the focus of her time as Alberta's Minister of Finance. By the looks of it Albertans will need a new mind set to think long term. Adopting a Genuine Progress Indicator model of measuring real growth - not just GDP would be a great place to start a change of mind set.

Dying Ducks - The New Symbol of the Oil Sands Spells Disaster for the Alberta Energy Sector

Good for Roger Soucy of the Petroleum Services Association for this quote in a Calgary Herald today. It is a good piece of journalism on how the energy industry feeling the heat on ecological concerns with the death of 500 ducks in oil sands toxic tailing ponds

Here is the excerpt:
Even the Petroleum Services Association's Soucy says he remains optimistic, though he concedes energy-sector players have to adjust to "new realities" if the industry wants to maintain its social licence to operate. (emphasis added)
"Things are much more positive than they were in the fall," he said. "It's just going to take some time.
"Face it, you have to be optimistic if you're going to drill a hole in the ground and hope to get something out of it.
"It's always a risk, but you still have to be positive. That's what makes this industry work."

This is the kind of industry comment that shows a recognition that the energy sector has to come to grips with. It needs public support from Albertan – not just political support – if it I going to retain it social license to operate. Jobs and economic growth are vital to the well being of the province…but it is not the only thing that contributes to our well being.

When those holes are drilled in the ground, it is not only the investor funds that are at risk. There is risk for wildlife habitat especially for suffering species like grizzly and caribou. There is risk to the biodiversity of the province. There is potential for water and air risks and the negative impacts of fragmentation of the land base. Then there is the long term responsibility of the industry to reclaim the lands back to a useful, if not original purpose. I have not even mentioned the social aspects of well being that are impacted positively and negatively by too much growth too fast.

If the energy industry want to retain its social license to operate it need to address the value drivers of Albertans that relate to their activities. Our research shows the major value drivers and concerns of Albertans are around habitat, GHG, water usage and reclamation. Those are the hot topics for the

Many energy companies are conscious of this "new reality"already and are engaged in the issues. But they have a long way to go to convince the public who have been focused activated by the death of ducks in a toxic tailing pond - and full page newspaper ads apologizing are not going to cut it to regain public respect and trust.

Why Can't the Calgary Health Authority Live Within a Budget When Edmonton's Can?

May 13 UPDATE: Don Braid of the Calgary Herald has some interesting things to say on this issues.

This attitude from the Calgary Health Authority drives me crazy. The presumption that Edmonton and Calgary are the same and somehow there is a health funding discrepancy between the two authorities is idiotic and pure politics. It always worked in Calgary’s favour under Klein. That erroneous and simplistic “logic” will not prevail under Minister Liepert.

The fact is Calgary serves a population that is more urban, educated, wealthier, younger, white collar, less distributed and perhaps more culturally homogenous than Edmonton. I accept that latter point may be disputable given the recent immigration wave that came to Calgary. These are indicator of better health conditions and outcomes. For sure they indicate a better and healthier population than exists in the Edmonton region.

The Capital Region Health Authority in Edmonton serves an older, poorer, less educated, more industrial blue collar and culturally diverse population. That industrial based economy is prone to accidents that tend to be more serious than white collar worker paper cuts. Edmonton has a more dispersed population too, serving the north where we find all the Alberta development and related danger form accidents and social breakdown. All this indicates Edmonton will be a more expensive and difficult health care system.

The Calgary Health Authority can’t ever seem to manage its budget. It has perpetual deficits and the Calgary solution is to automatically run to the province for more money – and Klein always obliged. I can remember one year when Calgary ran a $70m deficit and the Capital Region Health Authority ran a $17m surplus. There were no unusual Calgary specific higher health demand circumstances that year. Go figure!

Come on Calgary. This perpetual self-absorbed Toronto wanna-be attitude and the over the top hubris about being better than Edmonton is childish. Surely the talented private sector brains down there can do better. If they insist they are better than the Capital City of Bureaucrats who makes up Edmonton why can’t they simply do it?

Calgary, as we are constantly told by Calgarians and their media, is where all the management and financial talent exist in the province. Just look how “smarter” they ended up being about the impact of the royalty review…surely they weren’t bluffing about something so important to the entire province. Surely they can get that kind of talent to serve on the Calgary Health Authority. Maybe then the Calgary Health Authority can actually do a better job of providing quality health care for Calgarians and provide top value for taxpayer dollars too. Give the superior attitude that is always spouted down there, this ought to be a slam dunk – wouldn’t you think?

Minister Liepert has made it pretty clear that the governance of the health care system is on the table as part of his efforts to change "mind-sets." Looking at the mind set attitude and actions of the Calgary Health Authority I's say it is a damn good thing he is looking at some serious governance changes.

Tailing Ponds and the Tale of Two Leaders: Stephen Harper and Ed Stelmach

Readers of this Blog will know I am no big fan of Prime Minister Harper. However, when he gets things right, I have to take my hat off and give credit where credit is due.

Harper Gets It:

The Prime Minister sure got it right in Edmonton the other day when he commented on the death of 500 ducks in the Syncrude oil sands tailing pond. He said the obvious when he commented "There were supposed to be systems in place to prevent this particular kind of event and obviously we're greatly disappointed, and troubled that we've seen what has occurred here." So what happened?

He shows he gets it with this comment, "I'm not here to make any excuses for the particular event that occurred in the last few days. It's a terrible event. It's not going to do anybody's image any good." So are we just going to spend money on PR to “improve” our image?

Then Harper put the incident in the larger context when he said, "Part of our responsibility as an emerging energy superpower is to be good stewards of our environment and also to become world leading on the environmental side of the business." Stewardship is the key issue here, not just growth at any cost.

Alberta - Not So Much:

The Alberta government response so far has not been as clear, consistent or as correct as it should be. Ed Stelmach is one of my favourite politicians but he seems to be vacillating and not showing that he “gets it” about the significance of this event. The GOA seems to be focused more on parsing the "facts. " Albertans are all about the greater symbolic significance of the demise of these ducks in these man-made toxic tailing ponds. The facts can be dealt with, but are they really all that critical determining how our political leaders need to respond to this "tragic" event.

Insuring and Assuring are Insufficient Responses:

The focus on the facts falls into the “insurance” level of pubic accountability. It is the lowest level of meeting the public's expectations for good governance. Screw ups happen and with the insurance approach to consequences the guilty are simply slapped with a fine - in this case of up to a million dollars. This fact of a fine has also been noted. Will a fine, of even a million dollars, change a corporate culture where the potential offender made a net profit approaching $300m in the last quarter?

The next public expectation level is for an “assurance” that public policy, industry practices and actual performance aims to prevent the repeat of such events. The failure to perform, the failure to monitor, the failure of timely notice to government, the potential failure to account and be transparent are some of facts that can and will be dealt with. This usually creates a governance culture of increased government regulation, monitoring, auditing reporting and enforcement. That increases government accountability and enforcement is obviously needed but is it enough to fix the stewardship problem?

It is an approach that too often results in industry merely complying with the new regulations as the stewardship standard. There is no incentive for project developers to raise the stewardship bar or to invest in new and better approaches. It is more about creating a corporate and political culture that worships the status quo.

Albertan's Know We Must Be More Responsible Stewards:

Albertans know we have a special responsibility to be global leaders in responsible sustainable development and also ensuring environmental stewardship - especially around oil sands development. A $25m PR campaign is not the way to prove this to the world. The indications are that the GOA has shelved its PR campaign aimed at countering ENGO messages about dirty oil ands. That image has already become the world-wide normative consciousness about Alberta's ecological values.

You can’t change values, earn respect or prove integrity with PR and paid advertising campaigns. We have to be more worthy and substantive than that if Albertans are going to regain the respect and trust of others in this interdependent globalized reality.

Why I Believe in Ed Stelmach:

Ed Stelmach made two very important and telling value statements during the PC leadership contest. He said “The environment trumps the economy” and “Leadership trumps issues.” Those two comments did a whole bunch to cement my conviction that his values were just what we needed for Alberta’s next leader.

Now, as the elected Premier of Alberta with an overwhelming mandate, Ed Stelmach knows he has to show us that he is serious about walking that talk. Good farmers are also good stewards of the environment. Ed Stelmach is well known as a good farmer. He has proven himself to be a capable leader. He can also be a good steward. It is time for Ed Stelmach focus on using his life experiences, his leadership skills and his stewardship values to ensure Alberta's economic, environment and social future.

Imagine No New Tailing Ponds for Oil Sands

Look at what is happening at the University of Alberta to eliminate tailing ponds, reduce water usage and apply CO2 to the extraction of oil from bitumen. And the water that is needed for pipeline transportation looks like it can be reclaimed from the existing tailing ponds. That means eliminating the need for new freshwater sources.

Lets get this research fast tracked! This is exciting and newsworthy stuff - and on a global basis - especially given how the toxic tailing pond duck deaths went viral around the world.

This is what a quality knowledge economy will do for Alberta.

It is Time Alberta Ramped Up Tailing Pond Reclamation Requirements

Back in the day Syncrude was one of the top rated corporate citizens in the country and for sure in Alberta. In the days when Eric Newell and Jim Carter were at the helm, Syncrude’s community involvement, imaginative philanthropy and social responsibility performance was exemplary.

Their fostering and nurturing of aboriginal people in hiring and contracting was ground breaking. They have recently received the first reclamation certificate for any oil sands operator. Their environmental leadership was also well known and respected.

Then things seemed to change when Exxon took over the corporate leadership. The focus became more about maximizing profits and pushing growth over an integrated sustainable an responsible approach to development.

Now it seems to many observers that this project is being run mostly out of Houston more than from Fort McMurray. Syncrude is a complex corporate entity with an interesting mix of other corporate owners. I am sure they are all starting to think about what exactly the impact of the recent death of ducks in their toxic tailing ponds means for them as owners and their social license to operate now too.

There were some players in the oil industry who overplayed their hands using intimidation tactics on Ed Stelmach during the public debate on the royalty review. I can’t think of a single threat those players made then that had any real substance or could be tied to the royalty rate increases…which do not even start until January 1, 2009.

The Government of Alberta is the proxy for the citizens of Alberta to ensure our natural resources are developed in a sustainable and responsible manner. The days of the energy industry self-regulation, self-monitoring and voluntary reporting of their environmental performance obligations should be over. Our government needs to step up to the plate and take over inspections and reassert its responsibility to the citizens of Alberta.

The need to ensure high environmental standards and enforced for air, land and water protection is squarely on the Stelmach government’s shoulders. They also need to take steps to ensure biodiversity and wildlife habitat protection has to be added to the GOA’s active engagement in ecological integrity.

Syncrude was required at one time to set aside $100m for reassurance around their reclamation obligations. That was reduced to a line of credit only. Then the annual $1m fee for keeping the $100m line of credit was eliminated along with the line of credit - with a promise that Syncrude’s reclamation efforts would start sooner. Syncrude has done some reclamation and it takes time but one site in 40 years is nothing to brag about in the bigger scheme of things.

Clearly the Alberta government has to demand that tailing pond reclamation for all producers start immediately and that it be done right – not just rapidly. Suncor, for example, has committed to reclaim its first tailing pond by 2010. That is a 136 hectare site that Suncor says will include rebuilding wetlands to encourage the return of wildlife. We need to see more examples like that coming from industry. Perhaps more huge profits being realized from $100 oil need to be invested in reclamation now and not wait for other generations to carry the can.

Government spending $25m on a PR campaign to “protect Alberta’s integrity” will do nothing of the sort and will actually do more harm than good if that is the key message. You can’t buy integrity and respect with advertising and brochures…you have to earn it. Substance over style and performance over posturing will have to be the new standards of behaviour that must become embed in our provincial culture.

Albertans will expect nothing less from their government and the energy corporations who we license to develop our natural resources. The energy industry is only a tenant. They are not the owner of the resource. Albertans own these resources and we have the obligation to insist our government and our tenants act responsibly and not just expediently in how they are developed.

The ecological tipping point has arrived and the citizens of Alberta are coming out of their cynicism and are mad as hell. I think they will become much more informed, aware, engaged and insistent about environmental performance concerns in all aspects of our provincial progress as an energy supplier.

Anyone who want to get re-elected or requires a natural resource lease and a social license to operate those resources had better take this new Alberta attitude to heart. The public is watching and they are not impressed.

Could Dying Ducks in Toxic Tailing Ponds Provide a Watershed for Oil Sands Development?

The demise of up to 500 ducks on the Syncrude tailing ponds may be the crystallizing event that finally brings the public to outrage over the way the oil sands are being developed. The ducks landed on the ponds on Monday but apparently the company did not report it to the government. An anonymous tip was how this came to the attention of government. Not good!

Cambridge Strategies did a Oil Sands Discrete Choice Modeling Survey last November and found that the dominant value drivers for Albertans around responsible and sustainable oil sands development was wildlife habitat, GHGs, water and reclamation. It is potentially the perfect storm for industry and government based on Albertan’s dominant value drivers from our survey.

This situation involves wildlife habitat, reclamation and water issues. That is three of the four top value drivers and oil sands issues that concern Albertans. The story about "ducks dying in a toxic tar sands tailings ponds" has gone viral in the Internet. The story has legs and it activates some core values of Albertans and others about the environment and oil sands development.

These events have the potential to push the industry out of deferring its duty to reclaim the ponds. For government and regulatory authorities, enforcement inertia will turn into urgency and a new focus on more effective environmental enforcement. For ENGOs they have been given a sad but saleable gift to draw even more attention to oil sands issues. They will become more energized to press their narrative about dirty oil and toxic environmental consequences of oil sands development.

There are rising expectation levels by the public on government and industry to be more responsible and accountable than in the past - especially around environmental issues. In the “old days” providing insurance against damages was the norm. When bad things happened somebody got a cheque and that was that. Think Love Canal.

The standards then moved to assurance. The expectation changes toward industry and government required that they show us that they have taken reasonable steps to prevent and mitigate possible damages. And they had to convince us of the appropriateness of the steps being taken. The use of air cannons as scarecrows to keep birds off the tailing ponds is an example of trying to meet this expectation level.

The emerging public expectation standard is becoming one of “ensurance.” Now the public expects planning and procedures to be in place to try and make certain that some things will not happen at all. This is a very rigorous test indeed but as the public perceives that there is insufficient engagement on ecological issues the natural response is to raise the bar of expectation and perhaps legislation.

Yes, I think we may have just seen the crystallizing event that will create the overt shift in the public consciousness to become engaged and more demanding about the consequences of oil sands development. The public’s questions and concerns that could emerge from this value activating event will be very interesting. How the government, industry and ENGO players respond will also be very telling.

If the governments and industry just try to push the PR on us with platitudes and rhetoric they will do more harm than good – for citizens and their own credibility and reputations. If the ENGOs respond by merely raising the rhetoric and the volume of their rant, they will be perceived as only adding to the problem.

If the players just try to fix the blame instead of fixing the problem they will all be convicted in the court of public opinion and they will all be hanged together as a result.

Government enforcement better be quick and convincing. Industry commitment to reclamation better be quick and convincing. ENGOs better present the best information and science they can muster. All parties have to look for ways to collaborate so government and industry can achieve a more integrated approach to sustainable ecological outcomes from development of the oil sands.

The death of these ducks may be the equivalent of the proverbial butterfly of chaos theory that flaps its swings and causes a storm of public opinion to rage in Alberta and elsewhere.

Nice To See Alberta Ministers Musing About New Ideas in Public

Anyone who has read this Blog for any length of time knows that I am a card carrying member of the Alberta PC Party and friend and fan of Dave Hancock, Alberta’s new Minister of Learning.

So with that bias disclosed let me say Hancock has been making some interesting moves in that of portfolio of late. Suggesting that school planning has been “insane” and that perhaps school boards are worthy of more respect and responsibility than they have been in the past decade and maybe ought to have some more political power.

I have to say I am surprised and encouraged by this new openness and policy commentary actually making news coming from Ministers like Hancock, Liepert on health reform and Morton on land use issues. This is kind of political using before matters get to Cabinet good for democracy and key to achieving a re-engaged and informed citizenry.

There seemed to be a message controlling chill over government MLAs and Cabinet Ministers expressing opinions before Stelmach became Premier. For sure, once a Cabinet decision has been take that position is, and should be, gospel for all Ministers. If they don’t like it they can resign from Cabinet. It has happened.

As a citizen I am as interested in what range of options is being considered and how policy issues are being explored before they go behind the closed Cabinet doors for decisions. I want to see want is left on the cutting room floor as these who govern us make the hard choices on our behalf. This new openness is so much more respectful of Albertans.

It is important that our policy makers show that they are informed, engaged and actively exploring options that, in the end, serve the common good. If the politicinas want to earn our respect and gain our trust they need to show citizens that they are not just in a sheep-like acceptance of a top down pre-ordained and dictated “political solution.”

I credit Premier Stelmach for this change in attitude and governing philosophy. The old-style pre-ordained political positioning that is pushed through a public consultation process purely for show is hopefully a thing of the past now too.

Is Alberta Suspending the Poisoning Wolves Just Because it Looks Bad?

The Alberta Government has announced that it “suspended” using its three-year policy of poisoning of wolves. This poison bait scheme was allegedly to control the wolf population and support the sustainability of the caribou populations.

The Canwest story is not all good news. It says” “Provincial officials argue that wolves are the biggest threat to caribou populations and will continue to shoot the predators from helicopters in the Little Smokey caribou range, about 40 kilometres north of Hinton. But, they say, the three-year practice of laying bait laced with strychnine to kill wolves has been put on hold. Killing wolves is part of the province's plan to help the caribou population rebound.” (Emphasis added)

Suspending poisoning wolves is a step in the right direction but the disturbing context around why this “issue” is being handled the way it is seems very short-sighted, shallow and narrow. It seems top me the justification for the suspension is based on issue management more than concerns for species at risk.

The Canwest new story says “…a spokesman for the Sustainable Resource Development, said Minister Ted Morton wants more extensive research done to address ‘public concerns and misconceptions.’ ‘Our objective here is to make sure the minister has all the information he needs and to feel comfortable in dealing with any of the public's concerns about how we manage wildlife….’"

Is our government therefore suspending wolf poisoning mostly because it looks bad? Maybe I am just suffering from misconception. Perhaps I need to be better educated about why we must correct our first mistake of not preserving caribou habitat by making more mistakes. We presume we can control nature by imposing ourselves even more on nature’s balance. That way poisoning wolves is now a justifiable remediation for our first folly. Is that the misconception I am suffering from?

Speaking of “misconceptions,” wolves are a natural predator for caribou populations and therefore a “threat” by definition? They are hardly the “biggest threat” to caribou populations rebounding, as is claimed in the news story. Man deserves that credit don’t you think? Especially given the way we have fragmented the forest and intruded on wildlife habitat in our ever accelerating single-minded quest in pursuit of GDP measured “growth and progress.”

It seems to be we may do less harm by doing fewer and more intelligent habitat interventions in the first place. We should spend more time and resources fixing up the messes we have already made by actively reclaiming old seismic lines, and unnecessary old road to help restore wildlife habitat. Maybe we should also spend more time up front on being more enlightened and sensitive to the impact we have on other species when we tear up their terrain in the name of progress.

Or should we just continue to say “screw it” – and justify killing the bad wolves that we deem are the real culprits endangering the caribou. To every complex and intricate problem there is always a simple answer that is WRONG.

This all reminds me of the children’s song about the old lady who swallowed a fly and then swallowed a spider to catch the fly, then a frog to catch the spider. Do you remember it? It ends with “I guess she’ll die.” When will we ever learn?

Developmental Disability Sector in Alberta Still Waiting for a Solution - The Budget Offered Nada

The Alberta government 2008-09 Budget funding announcement for the developmental disabilities sector is very disappointing. It is way too little and time is running out to fix the human resource problems in the disability services sector. Qualified staff shortages, unfilled vacancies and high turnover rates are largely due to the unconscionably low uncompetitive wage rates that the service agencies have been authorized/allowed to pay.

The natural consequences if such under funding are that vulnerable Albertans with developmental disabilities suffer. There is a high and unacceptable potential for mistakes due to negligence caused by insufficient staff levels and burn out plus more untrained and unqualified staff now are being recruited by necessity.

I have been working with these agencies professionally for about a year months on the funding issues and now on contracting issues. During the election Premier committed to “close the wage gap” between community based not-for-profit agencies and government employees who also provide services to Alberta citizens with developmental disabilities. This recent budget does nothing to close that gap. In fact it makes the gap with government workers even wider.

Here are some facts:

According to a recent independent consultant report the community based agencies pay about 2/3 of the wage levels of equivalent work in the government – and they receive much lower benefits.

To close the gap at the 50 percentile level of government workers would take about $182m – excluding benefits and only for current agency employees, ignoring the need to fill staff vacancies, meet population growth needs and to provide for any benefits costs at all.

Stop gap wage funding (sic) measures have been taken by the GOA in the recent past, a onetime grant of $11m in the Spring of 2007 from Seniors and Community Supports departmental year-end surplus funds – mad available because there were no staff to provide certain programs funds.

There was a one-time $15m grant last November that has apparently now been made part of the new funding base, a good thing.

Of the $30m additional money announced in the April 22 Budget, it is payable to the Persons with Developmental Disability Boards, the appointed government agencies who contract with the community groups to provide services. Only $24m of this total is going to the agencies to provide for front line worker compensation.

The $24m to community based agencies is about 5% but when inflation in Alberta in 2007 was 8.1% according to the Minister of Finance in a fund raising speech I heard her deliver on April 23 and minimum wage is going up at the same time, this funding level is not getting ahead of the human resource recruiting staff retention problem in the disability sector.

The PDD boards are retaining $6m of the additional budget funds, 20% of the total new funding, to cover inflation and their AUPE based staff wage and benefits increases… the same wages and benefits where the Premier has promised to close the gap for the community based agencies.

The September 2007 AUPE /GOA wage settlement was 14.66% over three years (4.9, 4.8 and 4.3%) with a $1500 signing bonus paid to each full time employee and pro-rated with part-time and seasonal employees. There were changes for many job classifications ranging from 7 percent to about 15% in the first year of the agreement.

There was an additional $6,000 - $6,300 northern living and a $12,480 annual living allowance for living in Fort McMurray. There was also an “improved core benefits package effective July 1, 2008 and an “enhanced benefits packages at the employees cost.”

The government “commitment” of additional agency staff compensation funds for next year was also announced at another 5% or $20m more dollars.

The gap is getting wider not smaller notwithstanding the Budget Speech saying “We will also increase funding to agencies contracted by our government to provide care for Albertans, to help
those agencies recruit and retain staff.” It will not happen at these funding levels.

Most of the community based service provider agencies have signed 6 months contracts that end October 1, 2008. They cannot continue to provide adequate service levels if they cannot attract and retain qualified staff. If serious levels of new funding are not forthcoming it leaves few options and it will all come to a head when these current contracts expire.

At the end of the day it is the GOA who is responsible to meet the needs of citizens with developmental disabilities. I hope they have a Plan B ready to meet the needs developmentally disabled Albertans if no additional funding for the sector is their Plan A.

Harper's Hypocrisy is Trying the Patience of Canadians

While waiting for the Alberta Budget speech today, I have to take a few minutes and comment on the Elections Canada initiative to enforce the legislation they are entrusted to enforce. The spending dealings and the positioning of the Harper Conservatives with the RCMP assisted investigation has to be treated judiciously.

The Cons are spinning and framing of these events as merely being a “visit” by the RCMP. This is like suggesting you are leading a parade when there are people with tar and feathers who are actually chasing you out of town. The selective messaging to selective media in secret briefings only undermines the credibility and erodes confidence in the Cons as being of sufficient character to continue governing. The unsubstantiated allegation that others have done this too is the well worn Cons ground saying “that yes we are bad but the other guys are worse.” Canadians are not tricked, amused nor reassured of having an effective and responsible government with such ill-conceived defenses.

The Cons say the facts are agreed upon but I think that is premature until Elections Canada confirms they also agree on the facts. There are some significant fact discrepancies to my mind, that go beyond the spin and positioning of events perpetrated by the Cons. Consider the Cons said they gave Elections Canada everything they asked for. Apparently Elections Canada felt compelled to go to Court and get a search warrant to ensure they got all relevant documents…and they felt it necessary to engage the RCMP in helping to enforcing the search warrant.

Hardly seems like the parties are on the same page, never mind agreeing on the facts. We will never know if the $1.3million of additional advertising spending the Harper Cons that was shuffled from over 6o candidates to support key Quebec candidates had an impact on the election outcome. That is a concern, especially if the conclusion of the Elections Canada investigation finds that the Cons broke Canadian law. However there is very little we Canadians can do about that now. We have to wait until the next election when we can rethink about who we wish to grant our consent to govern us.

The hypocrisy of the Harper Cons is breathtaking and has been for quite some time. They are not as keen on providing Canadians with a good government as much as they are focused on beating down Stephane Dion. We will never know how many millions the Cons spent for party donations on the Dion TV attack ads. This was more Harper Con cleverness because the money was spent outside the Writ period, but when they thought an election was imminent, but those funds would not have to be included in campaign spending limits. Again the Cons show too much cleverness by a half. Now the Cons are abusing their free postal privileges with Canada Post and flooding the country with pamphlets that harp on the Liberals but not providing good government.

The fact they have been unsuccessful at engineering their own defeat has frustrated the, perhaps it is time Mr. Harper called upon the Governor General and tender his resignation. I expect Dion and Layton would not want to try a coalition government and Mr. Harper would have his “dream” election immediately.

Alberta Budget Not Likely To Introduce Big Changes - But Next Year Will Be Different.

It is Budget Day in Alberta tomorrow. I do not have any inside information but have some thoughts and speculations.

I do not anticipate any significant changes from the draft budget that was done and ready to go before the election was called. Since the Budget speech is so soon after the Cabinet and Committee structures were announced there is not a lot of time to rehash the original positions.

There will be budget increases for some departments to cover inflation costs and some growth pressures and recent AUPE wage and benefits negotiations. There is no indication that there will be the big bucks needed to resolve the staffing shortages in areas like community based nor-for profit agencies in the disabilities services sector, children’s services, women’s shelters and long term care.

For the record and full disclosure I am working on this issue with the Alberta Council of Disability Services. We are talking about $200M to get these people paid at the 50 percientile level of government workers doing equivalent work. This will not happen overnight but the Premier is aware of the problem.

I expect there will be lots of budget focus on capital expenditures as the province continues to fix up the as-built maintenance deficiency and new facilities to respond to growth pressures...schools, hospitals and roads.

There is a recognized need to build new structures and retrofit existing buildings to a more eco-friendly standard. That will add costs in the short term but pay off in reduced operating and environmental costs long term. That is a hopeful sign that a new full cost accounting approach for capital expenditure will become the norm.

There is a lot to do in refocusing the fiscal framework for Alberta but my guess is most of it will be deferred for the next budget. That process will likely start by this Thursday and be about more savings and more spending both operational and capital accounts. There ias one thing for sure...Iris Evans is going to be busy – very, very busy this spring and summer.

Engaging Albertan's in Climate Change

There is a different sense of urgency amongst young people about the destructiveness of human impact on the environment.

This video is an example of the urgency youth feel about climate change. She is a 13 year old Vancouver girl who really set out the issues and concerns at a UN Conference on the Environment.

In the early 90’s Albertans set out on a mission to get rid of our fiscal debt and deficit. We did it with a single minded focus that engaged the entire province and drew people together to make personal sacrifices. We could have done it better – like making sure we did not harm the provinces social and physical capital at the same time as we made massive and brutal cuts in government spending.

A large part of our motivation was we decided as a province that we could not face our children if we saddled them with this enormous fiscal liability we had accumulated in the 80’s due to plummeting oil prices.

It is time to revisit the focused set of values and reconsider what kind of society and environment we will leave for future generations. This ecological effort will also take a significant personal focus and entail changes of behaviours that many will see as sacrifices. Alberta is an obvious place to start this change in behaviour and attitude towards the enviornment.

We need a crystallizing moment that triggers the collective consciousness and captures imagination of Albertans to get this change happening. Then we will see the massive changes necessary in our personal and collective behaviours that must engaged to really address the crisis identified in this video.

The crystallizing moment or event can we launch an ecological crusade of common cause and mutual caring for the greater good. I only hope we can do it by an intentional deliberate design process and not await another disasterous moment or event in order to get our attention.

Thoughts On Wolves, Mankind and Nature

I have to compliment the Edmonton Journal’s environment writer Hanneke Brooymans on her excellent piece in today’s Sunday Reader section entitled “Man at the Door - Wolves in the Crosshairs.” She illustrates just how human “development” has come to be an escalating problem and our solutions of more intervention have mostly just made matters worse.

We definitely need to intervene, especially in Alberta. But we need to engage in ways that cleans up the destruction and fragmentation we have wrought on the landscape already and that has served to destroy and interfere with wildlife habitat, particularly in our boreal forest. We need to accelerate our efforts and commitments to restoration of the unused and unnecessary resource roads, seismic lines and pipeline right-of-ways, and abandoned and orphan oil and gas well sites. We need to get on with reclamation of oil sand pits and tailing ponds. And we need to move immediately to create biodiversity based off-sets to balance the consequences of oil sands development that will take vast areas of the forest out of the natural patterns and purposes for up to 80 years.

The planned intervention against wolves in Brooymans’ feature seems to be a textbook case of human hubris as presumptive, capable and competent managers of the environment. We chose to kill and sterilize wolves in the pursuit of saving caribou instead of engaging in acts of stewardship that would reduce our impact and interference on wildlife habitat overall in the boreal forest and enable nature to restore itself.

We know our human activities are major causes of this imbalance in nature but we default to further interventions in, on and against those natural patterns. We inappropriately assume that by adding more human impact on the forest and wildlife habitat, (instead of reducing and reclaiming it from human activity), that we can “have our cake and eat it too.” This is the overarching observation of the University of Alberta noted biologist Dr. Stan Boutin in the Edmonton Journal feature story on wolves.

The new default position for humanity has to be is to strive to share the biosphere on a more integrated and equitable basis with the rest of the flora and fauna who are also “entitled” to share the planet. We need to learn to co-habitat and collaborate and integrate much more with the natural phenomenon that is inherent to supporting the diversity of life forms on the planet. We need to do this for the planet and also perchance, for the sustainable survival of our species as part of the future of the planet. Remember extinction is also a natural phenomenon.

We can’t continue in our pursuit of wealth creation that presumes the industrial definition of well being based on GDP justifies our on-going quest to conquer nature. We can no longer rely on and carry forward a foundational myth that says mankind can actually dissect, direct and control nature. Nor can we afford the presumptive arrogance and that our manipulations and interventions of natural forces can actually result in predicable and positive outcomes.

We continue to take delight in this dysfunctional definition of progress and we almost deify ourselves as a species; believing that our “being” is somehow above nature. We tend to rely on our capacity to Dissect, Manipulate and Control nature as part and parcel of progress. We want to push an ever-accelerating industrial growth as being progressive even though we know such activities are often intolerant and indifferent to the long term consequences to the environment.

What if the next reality is based on the planet taking over dominance? Could the planet take a Control, Alter and Delete approach and “reboot” itself to rid itself of the crap that has accumulated and that is causing it harm? I know this is more poetic than a practical analysis. But it is no more far-fetched and metaphorical than believing human-kind need not change its beliefs and behaviours for the sake of the environment and in response to climate change.

We are now starting to recall and re-accept that nature is a force unto itself and that it is full of intricate patterns and constant changes. We are learning to re-appreciate that these natural changes are spawned and sustained by self-organizing adaptive sets of feedback mechanisms that are embedded in that intricacy. We are recollecting that life itself has an energy composed of the collective and collaborative diversity of the biosphere.

This renewal of human awareness of our place in the grand scheme of things is catching on and is also evolving. This renewed consciousness is making our presumptive mythology that mankind can actually control nature and predict its outcomes "questionable." This questionable human conduct is more than just another event in the long line of follies that have marked the absurdist history of our species. It is not merely a silly and discountable foolishness. It is downright dangerous and reckless and particularly crucial to the vitality and survival of our own species.

There is no doubt that the future of planet Earth is assured, and life will continue in some form or other. What is not clear is what that future of the planet means for mankind, given the hubris of our current dominant consciousness, beliefs and behaviours. Just what the hell we are doing and why is something to think about and reflect upon as we anticipate Earth Day coming up next Tuesday April 22nd.

Stelmach's Throne Speech Addresses Lots of Priority Concerns

I have spent some time studying the recent Alberta Speech from the Throne. It is worth your time to read it and reflect on the content and context.

There are the obvious focus elements on energy resources but in the context of sustainable development. There is a promise of provincial energy strategy focused on innovation, new sources and responsible energy use, efficiency and conservation. Balance needs to be restored and the Royalty Review issue is not really resolved yet and this energy strategy may help compensate for the short coming of the GOA respsonses.

The pace of development is noted as an on-going issue – particularly in terms of housing in Fort McMurray. The GOA holds the keys to unlocking this problem by releasing land to the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo so the servicing can get done and housing built. The cumulative effects of the growth challenge are now being considered and that is good news, especially for Edmonton and region with the pending impact of billions of dollars of upgrader construction.

The down side realities of the livestock and forest industries are going to be addressed as these folks are in dire straits. The need to look at the “cultural and economic importance of vibrant rural communities…” is noted and something I will be doing a number of posting on as I work on two new projects to get the SuperNet missing link to non-profits, local economies and rural Albertans through the Rural Alberta Development Fund and the Access to the Future Fund. These SuperNet based initiatives are foundational to Premier Stelmach realizing this Throne Speech aspiration...and he knows it.

Lots more coming this summer in consultations on Land Use Management and a new Parks Policy hopefully based on conservation, preservation, reclamation, water quality and quantity concerns and wildlife habitat protection as guiding principles – not just a negotiation of priority listing of users.

I am biased but if you look past the health care headlines in the MSM speech coverage, I see a lot of potential in this Throne Speech. There is a wide array of issues and concerns mentioned. It has the usually pomp and puffery but a careful read shows a definite and more progressive agenda and tone in this document. Now we need to see how it gets acted upon and if the agenda that we end up with is as comprehensive as the content of the Throne Speech indicates.

I will post again soon on some of the important social and cultural aspects of the Throne Speech that have not been covered much. Stay tuned.

What Is Wrong With Canadian Politics?

Anyone who values democracy appreciates the efforts of good politicians and sees politics as a force for good in our world has to wonder about what is going on in Canadian politics these days.

The RCMP raids, the fraud charges and the belligerent buzz and bluster that has surrounds these events and others…shows just how diminished we have allowed out political institutions and political players to become.

"Lament for Our Democratic Nation" is an excellent post by NDP Blogger Cameron Holmstrom from Toronto. This post catches and expresses much of my dismay and disgust with the way politics is going in our country. It is worth a read.