Harper has Become Tedious & Tiresome to Most Canadians

What is soon to be former Prime Minister Harper thinking saying he doesn't believe any taxes are good taxes. Jeffery Simpson's column in the Globe and Mail today puts that inanity in context.

Last week Mr. Harper went out of his way to take a moment of statesmanship coming out of the G8 and turn it into a cheap and mistaken partisan diatribe against his nemesis Michael Ignatieff. Harper is always quick to take a political shot regardless of accuracy in this case. His apology was clinical more than heartfelt.

He constantly misleads and misdirects media and public attention from the facts and serious issues of the day. He constantly changes political tack without personal tact. We have come to expect attach ads, cheap partisan shots, demagoguery and abuse disguised as "discipline" often applied to his caucus. Gamesmanship over governance is this man's default position as a political "leader."

We know we can't trust or believe him any more. The fact that this recent behaviour and character flaws only amount to a one day story shows just how much Canadians have tired of Harper and his bullying "style" Our experiment with minority government will likely end next election and hopefully Canadian voters will deliver us from this authoritarian autocrat.

It is time to return some respectful and capable leadership that is capable and committed to the greater public good and who sees government as a positive contributor to those ends. Today that is any federal party leader other than Prime Minister Harper.

Canadian, Please Should go Viral.

There is so much heavy stuff happening these days it is important to take stock of our benefits as Canadian. Here is an example of that Canadian spirit done with some serious whimsy. Check out "Canadian, Please." I love the lyrics, sentiment and the energy of these "starving artists" as they celebrate the glories of Canuckistan.

Thanks to Cathie Walker for putting the link on Twitter and making my day in the bargain.

Share the incredible lightness of being Canadian and forward the video far and wide. Don't be loud and proud in your email cover. Be moderately audible and pleasantly humble. Be Canadian, Please.

Will Climate Change Cause Border Wars?

The Economist has an article speculating about climate change creating border conflicts. What do you think? We already have our first phase of climate change refugees and more to come.

This is the single greatest threat and opportunity mankind has to prove the Prisoner's Dilemma is more than a game.

All of mankind - not to mention other species - are all in this together. What are you thoughts on if we are wise enough to conserve and preserve instead of consume and presume things will be alright?

UPDATE: THX TO A TIP FROM ANDREW MCINTYRE HERE IS A LINK TO A VIDEO OF GWYNN DYER ON TVO'S BIG IDEAS TALKING ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE REFUGEES ADN OTHER MATTERS.

Poll Says Canadians Fed Up with the Minority Government

Strange to release a politically based poll on Canadians attitudes toward government on a Sunday but that is exactly what Harris Decima did yesterday. The findings are dramatic. By a 3:1 ratio Canadians now prefer a majority government. "Canada's five year experiment with minority government appears to have sparked a desire for majority government to return." says Jeff Walker Senior VP at Harris Decima.

This is the early warning signs of the game changing attitudes that are emerging amongst Canadians and the role and relationship they want with their federal government. While the stomach for an election is still not there, the next election portents to deliver a very different result as Canadians want more accomplished by its federal government. Minorities are clearly not seen as the way forward.

The largest proponents of majority government comes from Atlantic Canada (72%) and Alberta (69%) with no region below 60% support. Conservatives and Liberals supports all feel the need for a majority government even more strongly, at 74% and 77% respectively.

The array of minority governments for the past 5 years are seen a done as much as can be expected by 60 % of those polled. Only 52% of Quebecers are pleased with the performance of the minority governments. 72% of Albertan, a Conservative stronghold, saying they are satisfied with the past accomplishments of minority governments.

So what does this mean going forward? Hard to say since a single poll is just a snapshot not a moving trend line and with no election expected it the near future the results are soft in determining any actual shifts in political power preferences . That said, these results are still intriguing as to what preferred outcomes are indicated for the next election.

Overall 24% want a Conservative majority and 30% want a Liberal majority. Quebec is the strongest for a Liberal majority at 36% and Alberta is big time for a Conservative majority at 47%. The votes are in Ontario and Quebec so those preferences are key to what might actually happen next election. Ontario votes are evenly split between ad Conservative and Liberal majority but Quebec' s preference for a Liberal majority is significant. The Bloc, NDP and Greens would all prefer a Liberal majority or Liberal minority over Conservative options.

So Liberals have work to do in Ontario and have to get other party faithfuls to want to defeat the Harper Cons to the point they shift the final results to a Liberal majority. Harper is in decline as his his party. Given time and a real threat of an actual election they could be the attitude of other party supporters - they want to get rid of Harper more than preserve their own position and all for the good of the country. It will be an interesting election when it happens.

July 14/09 update: Dave Breakenridge's editorial in the Edmonton Sun today adds some more context and heft to the recent poll showng a desire for a majority government. Worth a read. What do you think?

David Emerson on the Premier's Council of Economic Strategy

David Emerson, the Chair of the Premier's Council on Economic Strategy for Alberta is interviewed by Adam Radwanski of the Globe and Mail. It is early days for the PCES but this interview outlines some of the mandate principles going forward.

I am looking forward to seeing what comes out of this process and what the government does with any recommendations. Lots of work to do and some serious forward thinking is badly needed.

I will be posting progress reports on the PCES from time to time.

Let's Not Squander This Recession but Use it to Revisit the Role of Government.

There are other elements to consider around the recent declaration by Premier Stelmach that there will be no tax increases on his watch. Deficits are also tax increases by other means because the pain is deferred to the future - usually to be repaid on someone else's watch. So it is arguable that running a deficit is a defacto tax increase just not on the current watch.


But there are other considerations too. The tobacco tax was not a money grab, it was a health promotion and prevention issue behind the tax increase last April. The research shows that more expensive smokes are and the less visible they are - like the elimination of the "power wall" displays, the less likely kids will start and get addicted to tobacco. There is also a health prevention argument around the liquor tax. Eliminating them both government reduces revenues to offset deficits (tax increases by other means) and increases the social and health risks associated with these legal but sometimes lethal products. I am not a prohibitionist just a realist.


The last additional point I think is worth noting about eliminating the revenue side from the fiscal took box of government is the issue of the role, efficiency and effectiveness of government. The old Klein approach of simple-minded across the board cuts and damn the consequences is not likely to be the Stelmach approach this time. However, there may be stuff government can do without, stuff we can do better and other stuff that needs doing particularly in a prolonged recession like we are in these days. This is the time to do that kind of revisiting and revamping of the relationships and roles we expect from government.


This recession is a perfect opportunity to revisit and redesign the role of government and our relations to it, as business, service providers and citizens. We can improve delivery and be clearer on what we expect of the public sector and our governance model. We can retool the private enterprise sector and community based social service sector too. The goal is not just efficiency, as important as that is, but it must be more focused on the effectiveness of the outcomes and how we achieve them using government as a vehicle.


This is a quest for better questions as much as it is better answers. We have the Governance Secretariat looking at these matters focused on agencies boards and commissions. We need the same thing to happen in the link between government and the social services sector and the private enterprise sector too.


Lets not squander this recession. Let's make sure we come out of it better focused, better equipped and better able to meet the challenges in the 21st century realities. It would be such a waste of an opportunity. We can't merely try to revive, restore and sustain the inadequate governance, economic, environmental, social and technological models of the past.


Premier Stelmach is hinting at this approach in some follow up comments to his no recent tax increase declaration. Lets hope he makes it more explicit and actionable.

Comparing and Contrasting WRAP Leadership Candidates

Politics is an ever changing world and party leadership contests are windows into the culture of change - not just the change events themselves.

The Wildrose Alliance Party is going through a leadership contest with two main candidates, Danielle Smith and Mark Dyrholm. The Calgary Herald ran separate pieces by each candidate but both entitled "Why I Want to be Leader of the Wildrose Alliance." Since they were published over a month apart I thought it would be helpful for Albertans to see them at the same time and side by side for contrast and compare purposes.

I would never join the WRAP but found the candidate pitches to be very interesting at a few levels. First both candidates are Calgary based so they provide some insight into the right-wing sensibilities in that city. Then they were both once active Alberta Progressive Conservatives but became disillusioned in what they saw as a progressive shift in the PC Party post Ralph Klein and they left to join the WRAP.

That reasons for leaving the PC Party is the third interesting insight from the comments of these leadership candidates. Post debt and deficit Smith felt the PCs "..slowly began to lose their way." As for Dyrholm, he blames Stelmach for "devastating the oilpatch" claiming he "torn up contracts" which I presume is a comment from Mark about the new royalty regime. That was nothing close to tearing up a contract if my assumption is right about Mark's statement. The Calgary "Patch" players have declared the royalty changes to be the new NEP and facts to the contrary will not dissuade them.

I am intrigued by other reason for wanting to lead the WRAP where I agree with them. Mark is criticizing the PC government for "eroded democracy with the firing of the Chief Electoral Officer because recommendations made were not one he (Stelmach) wanted to hear." I agree this is an important issue and with Mark's assessment of the implications too.

Danielle Smith bemoans the fact "Teachers fear being hauled before the Alberta Human Rights Commission under an amendment to the legislation that no one I know was asking for." Even casual readers of this blog for the past 3 months know how much I agree with that concern and oppose the PC government's stand on Bill 44.

Both candidates are staunch fiscal conservatives and like very small government. Smith is much more socially moderate than Dyrholm who touts his support for many very right-of-centre groups and his active role in the former federal Reform and Alliance parties - now known as the Harper Conservatives.

As I reflect on the WRAP leadership race I note they are former PCs who left mostly for what they say as a lack of fiscal discipline in the "conservative" side of the PC party. They both have concerns with some social justice issues, and that is a subject matter that appeals to the "progressive" side of the PC party. What might a rise in the political influence of the WRAP mean for the future of the Progressive Conservative Party if the fiscal cons gravitate to them and the social progressives disengage or go elsewhere?

My final thoughts was about what was lacking in the political consciousness of these candidates based on their published pieces. There wasn't any commentary from either of them on the environment or the need to provide for vulnerable people in our society as a society. The fact that these issues are not on the radar screens of these leadership hopefuls is a surprise. It will likely prove to be a fatal flaws for future electoral success with the greater Alberta population for whomever becomes the WRAP leader. Of course they both have time to adapt and tell us more about their position on these serious public policy concerns.

Ablonczy Gay Grant Doesn't Embarass HarperCons - They Do It To Themselves.

What kind of people are we electing to Ottawa? A HarperCon backbencher, Brad Trost, is floating a rumour that Diane Ablonczy has been stripped of her responsibilities for overseeing major stimulus finding in tourism - her portfolio.

The reason being given is she approved a grant ot the Toronto Gay Pride celebrations. Of course the official PMO spin was that she was eventually going to relinquish this responsibility to Industry Minister Tony Clement...who is conveniently in Italy at the G8 and unavailable for comment.

So a $100m stimulus fund for "Marquee Tourism Events" is not properly positioned in the Ministry of Small Business and Tourism but better administered in the Department of Industry??? And that this was done weeks ago but Minister Clement has been too busy bailing out General Motors to pay attention to his tourism duties. Sure thing. That is why Ablonczy's Small Business and Tourism Department is no longer in the small business and tourism business so far as stimulus finding goes. Right!

The Harper Cons have tried to blow smoke that they are learning to become socially tolerant and even perhaps a bit moderate and inclusive. Well that is as any thinking Canadian expected. It is more political positioning that heartfelt values for the neo-Cons mini-Rovarian Republican wanna-be Harper Caucus.

What kind of people have we elected and do they reflect the kind of Canada we are and aspire to be? We need an election to clean out the House of Commons and get rid of these reactionaries and homophobes. That kind of discrimination must not be accepted in Canada anymore.

Canadians are clear they want the minority Parliament to work and don't want election right now. Everyday the Harper Cons provide more reasons as to why we need an election sooner than later - even if we don't want one right now.

Budget Deficit + No Tax Increase = Serious Social Service Cuts for Albertans

Hunker down Alberta - and get ready for a raft of the public sector job cuts plus social services and community based program cuts. This is the only logical conclusion to come to based on the "no tax increase" announcement of Premier Stelmach today.

Given the game plan of the government, that stated with the Premier's reported comments today, of no tax increases, the multi-billion dollar budget deficit monster will only be tackled by program and staff cuts. Unless natural gas prices rebound dramatically, like right away, and they stay high for the rest of the year, Alberta has a chronic revenue problem. With a glut of natural gas on the market and stored oil supplies growing, prices for these commodities are not likely to escalate soon and not enough to deliver us from the fiscal evil we are facing.

Will there be a bunch of social services program downloading on municipalities too? This is going to be helpful just when as many as 60 Alberta municipalities are into formal dissolution processes that would terminate their municipal status. They are doing this because they can't sustain themselves on property taxes and current grant levels anymore. That should be interesting if social services downloading happens.

We have been told by our government that they are going to run some serious operational budget deficits right now and looking forward into the next few years. Cumulative deficits have a nasty habit of tuning into long term debts. We're Albertans. We know that because we have been there.

What a difference from February 2008, just before the last election, when Premier Stelmach said our PC government would never put Alberta back into a deficit position. Now he is saying deficits are back. The Premier's response to new deficits has been to reaffirm that there will be "no tax increases" on his watch. And to ensure the message hits home he is going the extra mile. He is actually reversing the recent tax increase on liquor that was passed in the April 2009 Budget.

News reports indicate that the liquor tax cut will cost the public purse $180m a year - just at a time when Alberta needs all the revenues it can get its hands on. This tax cut is even more unnecessary than Bill 44 was. It is enough to drive you to drink.

Media reports also quote the Premier as saying the liquor tax decrease can be in place this weekend. Funny how we cut a sin tax so assuredly and so swiftly but we can't figure out to ensure we are getting all our non-renewable energy resource royalites accounted for and properly collected.

What is going on? We have serious problems balancing the public purse. Understood!. We are running large deficits in health care. Shift happens! We have record deficits in our general accounts and they are getting larger. And our policy response is to absolutely rule out tax increases?

Not only that, but our official government policy is to go a step further to prove the point that taxes are not going to increase in Stelmach's Alberta. Damn the torpedoes. We have to put some serious emphasis to the political point about no tax increases. We have to announce an immediate reduction a liquor based sin tax? What gives? Is this the essence of the new fiscal plan for Alberta?

The only other option left, and that is actually within our control, is for Alberta us to get after the record deficit by government dramatically reducing social program spending. The biggies of health, education, children's services, seniors and social services can't be protected from cuts - especially with this brand of fiscal folly.

Our most vulnerable citizens, like the sick, elderly, children-at-risk and the disabled have just been put on notice that they are going to become even more vulnerable. Their caregivers, especially those community based not-for-profit agencies, have just been put on notice. They already have to squeeze their nickles until the beaver shits. More program and other cuts have yet to come, but rest assured, they are coming! So theses social service agencies better get a firmer grip on that nickle and start squeezing that beaver even harder.

This is ridiculous. All options need to be on the table to help Alberta address the fiscal force fields we are facing. Eliminating tax policy entirely as an budget option is all about pure political ideology and illogical fiscal policy. What is going on? I see half a policy step forward and three policy steps back these days in Alberta.

You are a wiser man than that Premier Stelmach. Reconsider your comments and conclusions. Do it right away before even more irreparable damage is done to the Progressive Conservative brand in Alberta. Bill 44 was bad enough. This is beyond the pale.

HERE IS AN UPDATE LINK TO THE CANADIAN TAXPAYERS FEDERATION NEWS RELEASE PRAISING PREMIER STELMACH FOR ANNOUNCING NO TAX INCREASES AND QUOTING MINISTERS LIEPERT, SNELGROVE, MORTON, EVANS SAYING ALL OPTION TO ADDRESS DEFICITS HAVE TO BE OPEN. Note to Reader - all these Ministers sit on Treasury Board with Premier Stelmach. The plot thickens.

Alberta Must Fix its Own Fiscal House Now & Not Pass the Problems on to Future Generations.

Alberta's Fiscal Challenges!
I am confused by the fiscal messaging coming out of Alberta these days. Albertans are into some tough times and more to come from what we are being told. With chronic low natural gas prices and other adjustment in our budget assumptions we can’t expect to rely on resource revenues to sustain our program spending.

There are some other realities that have put us in an operating accounts deficit position. However, let’s be clear Alberta has billions stashed away in various accounts – other than the Heritage Fund. We are borrowing the short fall instead of using the cash reserves. I think that is a good idea given the extremely low interests rate these days.

We are told we have almost a $1B of deficit from last year, then $4.7B in this year and now ballooning to $6.2 B. We can expect an even larger deficit next year even after we cut $2B of spending and Health Minister Liepert is reported to say he doesn’t think you can make that kind of cut in the system in one year in a recession. Recently we have been told by Minister Liepert that our leaner more efficient new health care system will tack on another $1B of deficit this fiscal. That is ironically the same amount as health care premiums used to generate before we scraped them.

What Can Be Done?

Go To Ottawa for More Money!
Part of the deficit “solution” being considered by the Alberta government is to go to Ottawa for more money to help out cash strapped Alberta, particularly for health care. Ottawa has rightly told Alberta we must be a “have-not province” before that would happen. Alberta is far from being a “have-not” province so we will have to find our own solutions to the health care budget shortfall.

Since Harper is now known to be low-balling his own budget deficit estimates according to the Parliamentary Budget Office who predict a structural deficit will prevail until at least 2014 the likelihood of Canada bailing out Alberta are between slim and nil.

Lots of Room to Raise Taxes & Still be Competative!
Alberta’s taxes are also extremely low compared to the rest of the country. Perhaps our taxes are too low especially if we can’t sustain our quality of living and public services as a result. Minister Evans noted in a Calgary Herald Opinion Piece in May 2009 that “…if Alberta had the same tax system as other provinces, Albertans and Alberta businesses would pay between $10B and $18B more in taxes every single year….”

Ted Morton is recently quoted in the Calgary Sun saying Alberta will have to cut spending and raise taxes. “The shortfall is so big. We can’t keep loading debt on the next generation. That is not what conservatives do” according to Minister Morton.

Why Not Charge and Collect Responsible Royalty Rates?
Well let’s talk a bit more about intergenerational fairness and the fiscal realities of Alberta today. What if we actually collected the royalties owed by the energy sector and stopped the high subsidy rates. The Auditor General estimates the Alberta government leaves about $2B per year on the table from uncollected royalties in the conventional oil and gas sector every year from 2006. In addition we subsidize natural gas drilling between $1.5B to $3B in foregone royalties. We are doing this at a time when commodity prices and supply gluts tell us it is folly to drill for more gas because all more supply will do is ensure prices stay low and Alberta’s royalty take will continue to languish.

By not charging reasonable royalties and not collecting those royalty rents on the non-renewable resources owned by Albertans the government is irretrievably squandering the birthright of future generations of Albertans. That is something Minister Morton says Conservatives don’t do.

Eliminate Flat Tax or Keep it & Put in a Sales Tax!
The other thing we could do is to eliminate the flat income tax and return to a progressive tax model. Alternatively we can retain the flat tax but institute a sales tax based on consumption and add a progressive tax element back into our system and raise much needed funds. This would bring in enough money to cover the deficits and still leave Alberta as the most tax competitive province overall.

Can we Look Our Kids in the Eye if we Don't Resolve the Problem Now?
It was way back in 1994-94 when our government consciousness caught up with the fiscal sentiments of Albertans and took on the challenge to eliminate the accumulated debt and stop deficit budgeting. One of the key motivations of the people of Alberta at the time was the unfairness debt and deficit was to future generations. Debt and deficits were seen as mortgaging the future of our children. When the task was accomplished Premier Klein said “we can look our kids in the eye again.”

Well we have the same shame now in looking future generations in the eye as we fail refuse or neglect to charge and collect responsible and reasonable royalty rents from our non-renewable resource energy sector. By failing to require and enforce restoration and reclamation practices for roads, wells sites, seismic lines and other disturbances inherent in the development of the energy sector we leave a negative legacy for our children to contend with. By not having adequate protection and enforcement of land, water and air standards we put an additional burden on future Albertans.

The 2010-11 Alberta Budget cycle has just started. The news is not good but the solutions are in the hands and within the power of Albertans to take on, control as resolve “adults.” It will take political will to accomplish the tasks but Albertans forced the political will on its politicians before - in 1993-94 over debt and deficit. Will Albertans once again take personal responsibility to resolve and adjust to the current fiscal realities and choose not to delay or defer them as a burden on future generations?

On-Line Voting is No Panacea

The Enlightened Savage has Kirk Schmidt as a guest blogger on on-line voting. He does a very thorough and thoughtful analysis. I say that because his opinion is the same as mine. Give it a read if you are interested in citizenship and democracy.

Canada & Alberta Caucuses to Discuss High Speed Rail Between Edmonton and Calgary

The Calgary Herald and Edmonton Journal are reporting that the Joint Canada-Alberta Caucus meeting being held in Calgary today will discuss the Alberta report on a high-speed rail link between Edmonton and Calgary.



This is great news. I am a big proponent of HSR for the Edmonton-Calgary Corridor for environmental, economic and social reasons. I was involved in the concept way back when I met with Jan Reimer and Al Duerr as the Mayor's of Edmonton and Calgary on the idea. In those days Japan was interested in participating in the project but it never got traction with the province. Now there are a number of potential options for a high speed rail link in the Alberta Corridor. This is an idea whose time has come and I know Premier Stelmach is a strong supporter of the idea as well and has been all the way back to his days as Minister of Transportation.


Alberta is trying to leverage is green image with the $2B commitment to carbon capture and storage and for a place of 3.5 m people that is an impressive investment. There is lots of good stuff to do in CCS but it is not as sexy as HSR would be as a global attention getter about Alberta getting green. Public Relations is not a justification for such a big policy decision but given how badly beat up the Alberta image is internationally, some positive environmentally PR that also enhances the economy at the same time would not hurt.


With 10m passanger trips between Edmonton and Calgary in 2006 and projections for that to grow significantly over the coming years means the need now is also partly political as a green initiative of the province. HSR is also an enormous economic generator as well as a providing societal benefit for the relationship of the closer integration and differentiation of the two cities. HSR has the potential to control growth in the corridor and ensure we don't succumb to sprawl as growth in the corridor expands.

Here is a link to the Market Assessement report recently done for the Alberta government. I will have to find some time to read it carefully. I recommend Albertans do the same.

It is audacious and bold but what better time to proceed on such an undertaking for Alberta than now? Build that train Mr. Premier.

Stelmach Premier's Council for Economic Strategy is a Smart and Timely Move.

It is a positive and profound move by the Stelmach government tap into some great minds and invite some fresh thinking into the future of Alberta. The Premier's Council for Economic Strategy differs significantly from the Klein era efforts in the Growth and Future Summits. Both events produced some worthwhile and interesting outcomes. But there was no real political will in those day to pursue anything forward thinking. It was all about reducing deficits and debt as fast as possible. The future would have to take care of itself as we focused only on the present fiscal agenda of the province in the Klein days.


I think the current Stelmach initiative is a forcus on foresight and that is significantly different. First it is intentional whereas the Klein efforts were mostly damage control or political response arising from musing of the former Premier. Second I assume there is positive political will to pursue the possibilities that will emerge from the PCES. Finally, the participant in the Stelmach process are past being impressive they are accomplished but also wise in the ways of the larger world and the changes that are bearing down on all of us.

There are 12 members of the PCES and they are all noteworthy and accomplished people with a range of expertise and a depth of experiences. Two PCES participants that are particularly impressive are Sir John Bell (Oxford and Stanford) and Juan Enriquez (Harvard) who are deeply involved in genetics and genomics but in very different ways. These are not the conventional kinds of minds one would by default apply to pondering the future of Alberta given their backgrounds. That is exactly why they are impressive appointees to the PCES.

I have met Juan Enriquez and been exposed to is fertile and curious mind over lunch and in other conversations. I have to admit I am very impressed with anyone who presents at a TED Conference and Juan has done so many times on a range of topics. A YouTube search of Juan Enriquez will give you a sampling of this man's mind.

Alberta is poised for a new era and ought to be leading toward that new era. We have an educated, diverse, young, healthy and prosperous population. We are sitting on the largest reserve of fossil fuel energy resources on the planet along with a stable government and easy access to the American market. Hewers of wood and drawers of water are not sustainble economic nor environmental presumptions for Alberta's future any more.

In the past this energy sector success has lead us to only consider the low hanging fruit of conventional oil and gas development. With the move to oil sands development and the synthetic oil and now synthetic natural gas coming from coal deposits we have potential for some adaptive foresight opportunities for the province. There are social and environmental consequences to growth as we have seen particularly form the last boom. A more integrated, full cost accounting and longterm lifecycle view has to become the new norm for defining progress and prosperity for Alberta.

What is also needed to secure a prosperous future for Alberta is a new mindset. That means we need to explore options beyond energy and options to look at energy in a new way, including new markets in addition to the Americans. A prime option for a new mindset about markets and opportunities is for Alberta to look seriously at India. My business partner, Satya Das, recently wrote a paper on the potential for an Alberta-India alliance you will find interesting.

I am very encouraged by the formation and composition of Premier Stelmach's Council for Economic Strategy. I am even more encouraged by its mandate to seek out and "develop ideas to ensure Alberta's continued prosperity and quality of life over the next three decades."

I see this initiative as a new pioneering spirit designed for the new times we are facing and about to face as a province. I plan to revisit the Growth and Future Summit reports but only for some background and context of past thinking. What we need is new thinking that may even be foreign to the typical Albertan consciousness. That is what I hope to see for the PCES and with men like Bell and Enriquez on board I am pretty confident that will happen.

Beware and Be Aware of the Political Back Story at the Calgary Stampede

The Calgary Stampede is in full swing and so is the political back story that happens concurrently with the midway, rodeo, pancakes, BBQ and bull riding. The Stampede time has a serious political dimension too. It is when the Alberta and Canadian political class converge on Calgary to party but also to position, plan and even posture a bit. The eastern political leaders like Ignatieff and Layton and May show ostensibly to show they value, "get" and embrace the west.

Many goofball pictures of out-of-character "city slicker" eastern politicians costumed up in in urban cowboy gear "grace" the pages of the newspapers and television newscasts over the years. Ironically no such picture as been so devastating as Calgary's own Stephen Harper for showing laughable unauthentic caricatures. My guess is shortly after that Harper hired a wardrobe and image consultant on the taxpayer dime.

Where politicians gather so will political consultants, lobbyists and various hangers-on and fast-track Wanna-Be's. The vast array of Stampede BBQ and breakfasts are meet and greet/grab and grin gabfests in the good old fashioned tradition of politics. There are other events that are more serious politically and they are mostly behind closed door meetings with, between and amongst the politicians go have made the pilgrimage to Calgary this week.

There are lots of private events and meetings with lobbyists and government relations consultants representing various special interests and politicians. But these meetings happen all the time and are simply part of Canadian political culture. Full disclosure, this is part of the work that I do professionally. I just never did it at the Stampede, at least not yet.

The more interesting political meetings will be the pure political events amongst politicians themselves. They are the joint Federal and Alberta caucus meeting and the Alberta Caucus Meeting on Monday. There are lots of Alberta-Canada complex political and critical policy issues in play between Ottawa and Edmonton. It seems, from an Alberta perspective, that there is no difference as to who is in power in Ottawa. Ottawa is still Ottawa even with a Conservative government in both jurisdictions. Shared partisanship seems to be irrelevant to finding effective resolutions on fed-prov issues and on US-Canada relations that impact Alberta.

In fact it is Michael Ignatieff, the Liberal, who seems more in tune and in touch with Alberta's aspirations. He is more informed and focused on our issues these days than Harper the Calgary Conservative. Will it make a difference in the forthcoming federal election? Who knows but Ignatieff's overt support for responsible oil sands development and insight into the Alberta angst and our importance to the country are being noticed in this province.

To be a fly on the joint Fed-Prov caucus meeting would be great fun. It would also be informative about where Harper sees his power and purpose in the months leading up to an inevitable election. Will we know what was said and what was the atmosphere in the room? Not likely. There will be media measured platitudes and strict speaking notes of having frank discussions and both sides having a better understanding of the issues and a mutual commitments to seek satisfactory solutions Blah, Blah, Blah.

The other critical political meeting that happens in Stampede week is the Alberta PC Caucus meeting. This is the real start of the next budget cycle. They get a serious sense of where things are at, what is happening in the province in a kind of SWOT analysis (Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats). Some preliminary policy and political objectives are usually set at this caucus meeting. General guidelines are determined for the administration to start the next budget cycle and the next years fiscal/policy/planning process starts as a result of this PC Caucus meeting. The whole thing will start to gel at the Cabinet and Caucus retreats in the Fall when the administration comes back with their budget and policy suggestions for the government for the coming fiscal year.

So tomorrow the Alberta government process about the fiscal and policy planning for the province starts. Ever since the retreat from the royalty review recommendations, the province as become more and more strategically incoherent. Lets hope tomorrow they find their footing and start to figure out a consistent, comprehensive and comprehensible path forward for Alberta. It will not be easy in these uncertain time, but it will necessary for the people of this province to continue to enjoy a high quality of living in economic, social and environmental terms.

Liberal Jim Wachowich Not Running in Edmonton Centre

My info is Jim Wachowich is not going to seek the Federal Liberal nomination for Edmonton Centre in the next election. He ran last time but not the next time. Mary MacDonald is eager and knocking on doors already. Will the Anne McLellan election machine reinvigorate and make the difference this time? Many Edmonton Centre Liberal supporters stayed home under Dion. Will new leadership bring them back?

Harper has forgotten and ignored Alberta and especially Edmonton. His Reform base thinks with Conservatives like Harper who needs a Liberal party? I expect many True Blue Tories, a.k.a Reform/Alliance types, will stay home this time to send Harper a message.

If I am right Edmonton Centre is once again up for grabs.


Anne McLellan in the Natural Resources portfolio in the Chretien government helped kick start the oil sands. Ignatieff gets the importance of oil sands development to the province and the country. He has back away from a carbon tax and supports Alberta's efforts at carbon capture and storage. He also calls for more investment in technology for the ecologically responsible continued development of the oil sands.


I'm still convinced we are into a winter 09 election. Will Alberta elect two new voices to Ottawa this time and send the complacent HarperCons a message? Linda Duncan and Mary MacDonald are the perfect candidates to accomplish both objectives? Here's hoping.

Is Bill 44 Already Reviving Some Old and Hateful Activitists

So the aggressive attitudes we feared would come out of passing Bill 44 are starting already. they are not just based on religion but attack "politically correct and pandering" to the legal acceptance of no allowing discrimination based on sexual orientation. Well known homophobe and pamphleteer Bill Whatcott has returned. Just Google him for some context. I am all for free speech and believe he has a right to say what ever he chooses, within the law. That is not my concern with these events.

This time he is delivering a flyer and targeting Alberta Minister of Government Services, Heather Klimchuk's constituency and labeling her as one who "panders to the media and celebrates homosexual pride" because she showed up and participated int eh Edmonton Pride Parade.

Minister Klimchuk was one of three Progressive Conservatives MLAs who were the first from the PC Party to participate in Edmonton's Gay Pride Parade a couple of weeks ago. Mr Whatcott is bemoaning that "...the Stelmach Tories felt they needed to send someone to Edmonton's shame parade to pander to the New Sodom." Wonder if he is also taking on the other two MLAs who participated in the Pride Parade, namely Doug Elniski and Fred Horne and distributing his flyers in their constituencies?

Politics is a blood sport played in public, without a net, and the rules are not always fair, as Doug Elniski has discovered as of late. Heather Klimchuk does not deserve this kind of abuse, nor does any other publicly elected office holder, but it comes with the territory. The members and organizers of the GLBT community can do without the revival of these old hatreds and stereotypes too.

The defenders of expanding and extending the opting out provision in Bill 44 into such broad areas of religion, human sexuality and sexual orientation and then piling on a Human Rights Act review and hearing process have tried to assure Albertans that this kind of thing would not happen because "Albertans are reasonable people." True enough, most of us are reasonable live-and-let-live people. But why did the Stelmach government take the enabling legislative step to empower and embolden the likes of Mr. Whatcott?

He is a well known reactionary Christian-values activists and at the extreme margins of the Christian community. His ilk can also undoubtedly be found in parents of school children who will be be just as inclined to target a teacher as professionals and private citizens. Teachers did not sign up for such terrorist type and targeting by fanatics. But the new opting out amendments to the Alberta Human Rights Act, that started out as the infamous Bill44, will no doubt embolden and empower those people to pursue their political purposes and agendas on the backs of Alberta's teachers.

This is going to be the stuff of good old-fashioned news to the MSM and the blogosphere. That is especially the case for the far right reactionary bloggers and those vile anonymous commentators we often get to "enjoy." The opting out laws masquerading as human rights and parental rights are ill conceived and so unnecessary. Nothing new needed to be done to secure and protect parental rights. The School Act provisions worked well for 20 years. Bill 44 was at best a solution looking for a problem. At its worst it is pure insider partisan appeasement politics beggaring a duty to provide good governance.

According to Mr. Whatcott, "Rather than stand on true principle, our so-called Conservative politicians prefer to pander to politically correct sexual perversion...." He then goes on to tell us why, in his opinion homosexuality is "physically harmful" complete with a graphic photo of anal warts which he says is an STD caused by homosexuality and "nothing to be proud of." Next he alleges homosexuality is "socially and mentally harmful" and lists suicide rates and says homosexuals are "overrepresented in child sex offenses." He offers no authority evidence or other forms of proof for his many allegations. He also denounces "bastions of homosexual tolerance like "posh corporations as the CBC, City of Toronto or Edmonton Police Force."

The spiritual harm of homosexuality is alleged to be evidenced by extensive quoting Biblical Scriptures. But he says there is "hope for homosexuals" again based on Christian forgiveness and Gods love of sinners. So the reactionaries are back, emboldened and about to wreck some havoc. This time is was a politician, Soon, I expect it will be some poor teacher who is just trying to do a professional job of educating our youth to enable them to live well and successfully in a diverse, complex and conflict riven world.

It is not to late to repeal those offensive opting out provisions of the Alberta Human Rights Act as the right thing to do as good governors and for the common good of society. To fail, refuse or neglect to fix this mess will undermine the essential social cohesion of Alberta and drive a values wedge into the rank and file of the PC Party too.

Sometimes certain politicians have to put away their "principles" and do the right thing, like repealing the offensive opting out sections of the revised Alberta Human Rights Act. As an aside, I will not be surprised if I am targeting by these folks for expressing my opinions on such matters. So be it. Free speech is not free because it requires vigilance and must be freely exercised, otherwise it will be lost. I look forward to your comments.

New Poll on Leadership in Alberta Says Stay Tuned.

I was talking to Mark Lisac of Insight Into government just last week on the lack of polling information on the performance of the Stelmach government and speculating why. We have seen some government polling released on the Branding exercise and on the reaction to the Budget but nothing on the government and leaders performance for quite some time. With all the changes going on in health and infrastructure, environment and the continuing crisis in social services I was wondering how well the government was doing in the court of public opinion.

It was good to see the Leger Marketing poll in the CanWest papers this morning. I wonder who commission the Leger poll. I presume it was CanWest but that is not clear. The Stelmach results are compared to poll results from February 2008 - a long time ago in political terms but the comparisons are valuable still the same.

Bottom line for Premier Stelmach - not much has changed with 41% Approval and 40% Disapproval ratings, even though the MSM say his "popularity take a hit." That is only true in the rural areas and all other differences from February 2008 are all within the margin of error and essentially the same today.

The province, Edmonton and Calgary are overall not significantly changed in 16 months. In fact the disapproval rating in Calgary is down 4 points. That minimal decease in Disapprovals has not translated into support in Calgary where he is done 1 point. The $3B taxpayer subsidy in the unraveling of the royalty regime in Alberta just to appease the Calgary energy sector suits has not bought Ed any respect in Cowtown. Edmonton is just the same as they were in February in their opinions of Stelmach with 48% Approving and 37% Disapproving of his performance.

However the Calgary suits may be modestly appeased with royalty cuts, Stelmach's rural Alberta base seems to be shifting away from him. The Stelmach Approval outside of Edmonton and Calgary is down 12 points to 40% from 52% in February 2008. His rural Disapproval rating is up 8% to 39%. That shift is significant. A rural grassroot crusade won Stelmach the PC leadership but if they are starting to abandon him to send a message of discontent. The PC powers that be are seem to be presuming that are going to the Wildrose Alliance.

You can see the politics in play here with the ill-conceived and ill-advised Bill 44 appeasement. the recent Legislative session had lots of political problems for rural Albertas from the land use to power transmission plans and new expanded powers for unilateral provincial powers to establish utility corridors. The recession is impacting small town Alberta hard as forestry, oil and gas, agriculture are all hit hard too.

The good news is Stelmach's worst enemy is likely himself and not the opposition. We don't have comparable February 2008 numbers for Mason and Swann but overall, Albertans are mostly indifferent to them as alternatives at this time with only a 22% Approval rating and larger Disapprovals in each case.

The more interesting data is the trend perceptions of the public's performance opinion of the leaders in the past year. Only 5% are saying they have a better opinion and 13% who don't know about the Stelmach leadership. We see the Stayed the Same and Worsened impression at 30% and 43% respectively. This is illustrative of the possibility of some sleeper issues capturing the public's perceptions.

Staying the same opinions in a recession could be interpreted as positive and worsening perceptions of governments and leaders are to be expected in a recession. However with the low overall approval rating to begin with a "stay the same" perception is not a blessing but a disguised disquiet that could blow up at any minute. Health care cuts and delisting services while Stelmach announces more royalty giveaways like the $3B to big oil to support natural gas drilling when there is already a glut on the market could be the political tinderbox waiting for a spark to inflame public opinion.

There are many more such examples but the point is that the people of Alberta are not happy and they are not sure if there is a coherent government policy strategy to deal with the real concerns they are facing. It has been almost 40 years of PC rule. Is the next tipping point for dramatic political change approaching? Beats me but the disquiet and discontent throughout in the province is crying for leadership. As the public looks around to see where that political and policy leadership is to come from they are coming up empty. That is typically a recipe for change but does that translate in Alberta? Who knows.

The poll was done with 900 random phone interviews between June18-21 with a margin of error of 3.3% so it is a pretty standard provincial sampling but the city and regional samples are smaller an have a 5.7% to 5.5% margin of error.

Uncle Jay Sings the News

Uncle Jay sings the news of the past 6 months in America. Very clever man with a fertile but somewhat warped mind.



Enjoy a little late Sunday night silliness before the reality of Monday morning crashes down.

Anti-Bill 44 Buzz Building as School Ends

Last Wednesday I sent out the last blog post on the challenges ahead for the PC Party on a possible resolution debate on the repeal of the odious portions of Bill 44 now in the Alberta Human Rights Act. It has been generating a lot of buzz.


I was sent this YouTube link from a Follower on Twitter. It is very funny, sad and satirical with Hugh Laurie. It is very funny and a great spoof on what the Alberta public education system can expect to face from aggressive social conservatives with a political agenda. This will only happen once this Act is proclaimed and school starts again in the fall.


Hopefully the Stelmach government will delay proclamation of the contentious parts. Hopefully they will then reconsider and repeal the unnecessary and offensive sections in the next sitting of the Legislature.


I will soon be posting some letter excerpts from those social conservatives received by the ATA during the Bill 44 debates. They will not identify the writers form privacy reasons but they do indicate their intentions and political agendas and how they intend to pursue them at the personal expense of teachers and with the result of diluting the quality public education in Alberta.

BTW the Facebook group "Students Against Bill 44" membership exceeded 11,000 - as I predicted. I encourage you to get on Facebook and join this group to send the message to the Stelmach government that you too are against Bill 44. This issue is not going away and the political pressure will come back in the fall.

The Rocky Road to the Repeal of Bill 44 Provisions in The Alberta Human Rights Act.

What is Next for Bill 44 Provision in Alberta Human Rights Act?
The frequency and volume of political commentary about passing The Alberta Human Rights Act (AHRA) that adopted the Bill 44 opting out provisions will diminish over the next few months. It is summer after all. The reality of the consequences of this ill-advised and ill-conceived law will come once the Act is proclaimed and becomes the actual law of the land.


There are some unrest and rumblings within the Progressive Conservative Party rank and file against Bill 44 provisions in the AHRA. I also hear some in the PC Party are trying to stifle and suppress any continuing talk about Bill 44, presuming it will be forgotten over time. I don't think that will be the case given the anger I have seen expressed over this bad politics and poor governance decision. That approached worked in a pre-Internet world but it will not work now.


There are a few moves afoot within some PC Party constituencies to submit a resolution for repeal of the opting out provisions for debate the AGM in November 2009. I am all for that and hope it happens but there are many hurdles to jump to make that a reality. Here is a sense of what it would take and what it would mean for the PC Party to debate the repeal of the opting out provisions of the AHRA at the next AGM.


The PC Party is not the PC Government.
First, if must be clearly understood that whatever the PC Party decides is not binding on the Stelmach government. The PC Party is just another political special interest group. It is not the government. I served on the PC Party Policy Committee for years but over a decade ago. I had a constant fight with the Reform/Alliance wing members who did not grasp the difference between the government and the policy proposals of the political party that supported it. Grassroots run deep with old-time Reformers.


Sometimes process is everything so here is how it works, as I understand it. I checked the process and it is essentially the same as in my day in dealing with Party Resolutions at AGMs. Here is a link to the PC Party website for the actual constituency resolution process, if you are interested.

The PC Party debates Resolutions at every AGM from submissions made by individual constituency organizations. Each constituency can submit two resolutions. The first one (the "A" Resolution) will always be debated. While the second one (the "B" Resolution) may not be debated because of time constraints. If there are duplicates of resolutions they are combined and only one is debated. Some resolutions are declined because the don't deal with provincial jurisdiction or they are too vague or too local in nature.


A group of Regional Directors and constituency level VPs of Policy, all as party volunteers, will do the vetting of the resolutions received. The A and B Resolutions are dealt with first come first served and up to 6 minutes of debate is provided for each one. Then any party member in the room can vote on the Resolution on a show of hands. Open transparent and fair to my mind.


Those Resolutions that get support from the membership are submitted to the government as information and advice. The government caucus then considers them and responds to the Party on each one, in writing. The government's responses range from agreement to disagreement and everything in between and often includes a reporting on the status and progress on resolutions and related issues.


Will the PC AGM Debate a Repeal Resolution?
So what will it take to get the AHRA provisions of Bill 44 to be debated as a Resolution at the November PC Party AGM? The first step is for a local party constituency organization to draft an appropriate proposed resolution and then decide as a local Board to submit it to the AGM.


That first step has already been done by the Edmonton Whitemud PC Constituency but there is a wrinkle. My information is the Bill 44 Repeal Resolution from Whitemud was a tie vote for second place - a "B" Resolution. The constituency apparently has decided to submit three resolutions rather than break the tie for the B resolution. It is an interesting development because the Repeal Resolution it will at best be a "B" Resolution and it risks not being debated due to time constraints. That has never happened in my experience in dealing with Party Resolutions, but it is a possibility, and in politics if it is possible anything can happen so nothing should surprise us.


Here are some interesting "What Ifs." What if in the initial Party vetting process they cull one of the two Whitemud B resolutions because only two Resolutions are allowed. Would the Bill 44 resolution be the one culled? The resolution vetting process could more likely send the two B resolutions back to Whitemud and require them to break the tie and will that happen or will they settle on only submitting an "A" Resolution?

If at the party organizational level, they decided to cull the only Repeal Resolution on such a technicality, I expect progressives in the PC Party would either revolt against the Party Executive or just leave the party. My money is on the Party going back to the Whitemud constituency and making them break the tie vote. So much uncertainty still prevails.


This could be avoided if another PC Constituency organization were to submit an "A" Resolution to recommend repeal of the AHRA opting out provisions. To date that has not happened but it might. I think it should happen for the sake of the PC Party itself but there appears to be some of nervous nellies who help run the party. They clearly want this to go away so all this Bill 44 controversy would just disappear somehow.


Some Serious Political Implications Around a Repeal Resolution
Here are some of the political implications for the PC Party, the PC government and progressive Albertans emerging from these various scenarios. If there is a Resolution for the Repeal of the AHRA opting out provisions debated at the AGM, and it passes, the Stelmach government can reconsider its policy and move to repeal the provisions. It can also say no, that is a done deal and they can refuse to reconsider. That is their option as our government but there will be repercussions in the PC Party and the PC government either way.


If such a Resolution is defeated by the PC Party membership then there will be soul searching in the progressive membership ranks of the PC Party considering if this party is still viable as their political "home." Who knows if or when that will happen. The party progressives I have talked to about Bill 44 know there is no other political party for them to go where they feel comfortable and believe they could be effective. The question then is will they join the other 60% of disengaged Albertans or pursue something different to express their political philosophy and aspirations for Alberta? Will the "Alberta Citizen Cynicism" party gets thousands more non-voters?


There are Implication for Progressives.
There is another more subtle but even more significant potential implication coming out of how the PC Party handles a Resolution to repeal AHRA opting out provisions. If they never received such a resolution from a constituency then local constituency ennui or angst against "rocking the boat" gets the Party off the hook. But that does not resolve the larger political issue, namely the anger amongst all the progressive Albertans who are still angry over the unnecessary Bill 44 optioning out provisions in the AHRA.

If no PC constituency organization has the courage and conviction to submit a repeal resolution for debate at the AGM I expect most progressive PC members will drift away from the party and be missing in action in the next election. The non-partisan Alberta progressives will decide to actively campaign against the PC Party in preparation for the next election. We are seeing the tip of that iceberg as evidenced in the wave of social media and traditional media commentary on the appropriateness of some recent personal comments made in public by Iris Evans and Doug Elniski. The PC Party and the PC government can expect more of this kind of scrutiny and aggressive response from now on - regardless of any AGM debate or its outcome.


If the Party receives a submission but tries to subvert the AGM debate of a repeal resolution I will expect to see progressive party members getting more vocal and deciding in droves to be no shows at the November AGM meeting. I can't see that subversion happening but it is politics and anything can happen. If it did happen I would be more disappointed than surprised. The likely unintended consequences are that the majority of PC party members who will "show up" at the AGM (and who will likely be encouraged to show up) will be those social conservatives on the far right of the party who tend to support Ted Morton.

There are Potential Implications for the Stelmach Leadership too.
Under those circumstances, a really significant political turn of events from the Bill 44 fiasco, that could happen at this November AGM. That is a potential threat to Premier Stelmach's continuing leadership of the PC Party. The PC Party Constitution requires that the Leader to face a confidence vote at the first AGM following an election - win or lose. That is how the Party sent a message to Ralph Klein that it was time for him to go a few years back. Ralph lingered as Leader, but the Party told him, in a vote of no uncertain terms, that he was past his best before date. He was gone!

PC Party Leader Ed Stelmach has to face a similar leadership confidence vote of party members at the November AGM.


What if the party "faithful" who show up at the AGM are predominantly social conservatives because they are emboldened by Bill 44? What if the the progressives stay home because the are discouraged by Bill 44? Could this be the "perfect storm" for the far right to give Premier Stelmach a low vote of support? What level of low support would seriously undermine his continuing leadership? What if his support is low enough, like Klein's 55% support? Will he have a backbench revolt of social conservatives that demand another leadership race? Will we be into a PC leadership contest for a new Alberta Premier sooner than we thought or even wished for? What will such uncertainty do to the Alberta economy and any recovery from the recession?


This is what can happen when internal partisan political expediency is preferred over good governance - like in the case of the Bill 44 fiasco. Bill 44 issues will be quiet over the summer but they will be front and centre again in the fall. Stay tuned. It promises to be interesting, unnerving, disappointing and even devastating, depending on your perspective.

It's Time for Rethinking and Reforming How Albertans Govern Themselves

I just read an interesting blog post by Sue Huff. She is a School Trustee with the Edmonton Public School Board and, obviously, a Blogger. She has just posted a thoughtful and practical piece on the controversy surrounding the recent comments by Minster Evans and MLA Doug Elniski. I really like her comments - because she agrees with my own views.


She ponders in her post about the impact these politicians who were "speaking their minds" will have on political discourse in our democracy. Will party discipline trump free speech? Will focus group tested safe messaging replace personal opinions of politicians? Will our governing class become incurious about new ideas? Will politicinas get spooked and become insecure in their values and beliefs? Will they respond by retreating to a political foetal position in the face of the realities of new media?


Sue Huff exemplifies the kind of leadership and trusteeship I was calling for in my paper presented to about 250 Alberta school trustees at the recent Alberta School Boards Association Summer General Meeting. In the paper entitled "A Contented Oyster Never Made a Pearl" I called up school School Trustees to take a leadership role in rethinking and reforming how we govern ourselves. She gets it and her recent blog post is all the proof you need to support that conclusion.


I think we need a more mature governance model in the face of Alberta's declining democracy. Sue makes a reinforcing point when she speaks about "The voting process in Alberta seems shallow to me; people vote for whoever showed up at their door, the party their family has always voted for, based on a 1/4 page flyer or the recommendation of a friend who is deemed 'up' on politics." We elect our governors. If we do a bad job in choosing who we grant our consent to govern us to, who is really to blame?


Citizens of Alberta have to re-imagine their place and what is accepted practice for politicans in our representative democracy. I applaud the kind of "unguarded" personal thoughts we have recently seen from two Alberta politcians. They have created forums for a broader and deeper discussion about Alberta society. For me it's all about free speech. I say use it wisely or lose it to mediocrity or mendacity!

Iris Evans Personal Comments Sparks a Public Debate About the Complexities of Raising Children - I Say Good For Her!

I have followed the debate sparked by the recent remarks of Iris Evans, Alberta’s Finance Minister about her view that the “proper” way to raise children is for one parent to stay at home. I am so pleased that the debate has been brought to the fore. It is a very important issue that deals with the responsibility we owe to children as parents, individuals, community and as government.

My bottom line politically is to value the fact that Iris Evan spoke her mind, clearly and with personal conviction. There is no other current Alberta politician who has done more for the plight of women and children, especially those at risk, than Iris Evans. She championed the project to raise awareness and work on prevention and treatment from domestic violence and bullying. She did this without the usual partisan political posturing. She focused on the issues and gathered the best people together to deal with the concerns – including men as victims of violence. I know because, full disclosure, I lead that portion of the project.

This issue of parenting and caring concerns are far from resolved and are at the basis for many conflicting personal values and societal duties. The trade offs of our various duties to children and to families and the conflicting needs of both parents to work t adequately provide for those children.

I don’t know the current numbers but there has been a significant increase in female participation in the workforce since the 50’s. The net result I recall in the decade 1979-1989 was a dramatic increase in females working outside the home but the net increase in household prosperity of those families merely increased 1% in that decade. Women’s workplace participation may have been personally and professionally satisfying but it did not do much to enhance the economic well being of the family. The increased taxes, inflation, cost of borrowing and other cost like childcare and transportation seems to have eaten up all the “additional” income.

I am not picking sides in the debate mostly because it is very personal and it is up to everyone have to make their own decisions about what is proper and practical. We all have a stake in this question of the care and nurturing, teaching and training of the children in our society too.

Is the Iris Evans approach the right one? I don’t think anyone would disagree – in a perfect world. However the word today is far from perfect. I am not wishing for the halcyon days of my youth when my stay at home mom and I could be supported comfortably on the wages of my Journeyman Electrician father – who almost always had a job in town and was home from work almost every night with the family.

I spent a couple of hours with Wallis Kendall from iHuman on Saturday on the Gun Sculpture Project we are working on together. He is the most engaged front line street level worker with the most dangerous and disadvantaged kids in our society. In discussion about Iris’ comments Wallis said, I work with lots of stay-at-home moms. The parent group he talked about is teenagers with children who were single parents, addicted but working on getting clean. They are uneducated, in poverty and mostly unemployable, especially in this recession because the jobs they are capable of doing simply disappear. But they are "stay at home" moms but hardly the optimal way to raise a family.

Wallis tells me they get their rent paid and they used to have to live on $600 per month to feed, cloth, diaper and deal with all transportation and other the care needs of themselves and their child, and find the hope and support to get past their addictions. Wallis tells me formula and diapers take up $230.00 a month. The Alberta support rates have being going down. Wallis told me now a mom in this situation with responsibility to provide care for two infants and herself now only receives $471 per month.

I tried to confirm these numbers online but without success so I rely on Wallis's knowledge of the supports situation. A proper way to raise a child may be for one parent to stay at home but that implies a whole bunch of other context and available family and community resources to make that a positive situation. The cost of living and the purchasing power of wages are way out of whack for the average family for this to be practical today.

Not only that we are squandering and becoming derelict in our duty to the next generation I the present way we deal with vulnerable and at risk kids, we are also chewing up the environment we will leave in the name of a false sense of short term progress and prosperity. We are also giving away our resource rents in a ridiculously low royalty rate and energy industry subsidies that perpetuate past sins that fragment the forest, destroy habitat, misuse water, spew unconscionable amounts of GHG into the atmosphere and fails to reclaim and restore old well sites, roadways and seismic lines. The lack of concern for inter generational equity in our current energy and economic policy is horrendous.

The energy sector is not the only problem. We all are in how we sprawl our cities, build our buildings and mindlessly use energy and pamper ourselves in our methods and modes of transportation. I think I have illustrated already the insufficient concern we show as a society for the weakest, most vulnerable and least capable in our society. We blame the government as if we are somehow not responsible for the consequences of how we voted or if we did not vote.

All these things tie together and inter-relate. One thing for sure, on a dais giving a speech at the Empire Club in Toronto, one Alberta Minister let her personal views and values about how to properly raise a family show clearly and concisely. Agree or disagree with her as you will but at least we have a politician expressing a personal opinion about a serious social public policy matter in a way that gets people thinking and talking. That does not happen enough in mature and pathetically passive democracies like Alberta.

Criticize her position if you choose. But at least for a few moments, seriously consider the concern, the context and the consequences of her comments. Then come to your own considered opinion based on your values and capabilities to do the right thing for your children, your family and yes – your community too. When it comes to raising kids “properly” it takes at least a viable village and a viable family with capable parents. We are all in this together; alone!

Twitter, Timezones and Terror in Iran

There are people all over the planet following the events in Iran on Twitter using #iranelection and #gr88 hashtags as a search tool. The pictures and video the Iranian Twitterers are able to get out of the country is truly amazing - especially under the dangerous circumstances they are in. The current theocracy is trying to shut down all media and communications out of Iran by blocking the Internet and bloggers plus the usual expulsion of the international media.

There are reports that media and bloggers are being arrested by Iranian military and a number of people have been killed in the streets by the military crackdown too. The next steps, taken last night, was for the military to mark the doors of the Tehran homes of suspected supporters of the rebellion. The Twitterverse was full of information about this targeting and distributed instructions on how to remove the door markings. Realizing how difficult it was to remove the door markings the follow up tweets was suggesting that ALL residential doors in the city. Don't know what the final result was but this is an example of how command and control centralized governments are being neutered by the dynamics of horizontal decentralized networks of engaged citizens.

Iran has an enormous and active blogging community, with Farsi being the 4th ranked language in the blogosphere. Not really surprising when you realize that 50% of the population of Iran is 30 years old or younger. Tough to imagine how arresting some bloggers will stop the rest. It will most likely embolden the rest to find ways to get the stories of the military crackdown and brutality out of Iran.

Twitter is still working well at getting the word out and informing the world about what is going on in the streets of Iran. It is also being used by Iranian officials posting tweets as a countervailing force using misinformation tweets. There are reports that the Iranian "government" is now targeting citizens who are on Twitter as part of the crackdown and retaliation against the dissidents and demonstrators. The Iranian "government" is using the timezone portion of the Twitter profiles of members to find these people who are using Twitter to thwart the communications clampdown the authorities are trying to impose.

The Twitterverse response to this targeting of Iranian dissidents is to ask the millions of the rest of us Twitter-types t0 change our profiles to the Tehran timezone so it will be more difficult to find the true Iranian Twitterers. I change my profile 10 minutes ago and encourage every one else on Twitter to do the same.

Musings and Misgivings About Being a Progressive Albertan

I have been getting a lot of emails from readers asking why I have not been posting this last week and why I have not posted anything about the Iris Evans comments about preferred parenting at the Empire Club in Toronto last week.

Well, as for the first question, I have been out of town working on a major project that captures my imagination so I have not been in a blogging head space. As for the second issue, I have been mulling about the Iris Evans comments on preferred parenting and will do a blog post late tomorrow on it. My working title is "Deconstructing Iris." What do you think?

I am also working on a major blog post on the recent vote in the Whitemud PC constituency to forward a resolution to the PC Party Executive to have a debate on repealing the opting out provisions of what was Bill 44 and now the new Alberta Human Rights Act at the party AGM in November. This is a very positive development but the reactionary social conservatives and partisan panderers in the Alberta PC Party could push this issue off the Progressive Conservative political agenda for the November AGM pretty easily if only it is only the Whitemud that has any balls.

As for the gratuitous advice from former Premier Ralph Klein on how to mishandle the Alberta economy by the mindless mathematics of across the board cuts, I think the less said about his approach to governance in Alberta the better.

I will be active re-engaged and posting plenty next week. Stay tuned.

Alberta Progressive Conservative MLAs Show Up for the First Time at Pride Parade

Thanks Daveberta for the pictures of politicians participating in the Edmonton Pride Parade. The very first time Progressive Conservative MLAs showed up. I know it is not good enough for many in the GLBT community for an MLA to show up at a Pride Parade but still vote for or not show up for the vote on Bill 44 - unless of course they actually believe it is good and appropriate law. It is encouraging to me, as a member of the Progressive Conservative Party who is opposed to Bill 44 opting out provisions, to see some of the PC Caucus "coming out" at least in this symbolic way.

I sense there is some continuing disquiet and perhaps dissension in the PC ranks over the ill-advised and socially harmful effects of extending and expanding parental rights. There has been no sound public policy reason given by the Stelmach government for passing a law to change a policy that has been in the School Act and working well for over 20 years. The only reasons given relate to some internal party politics to appease social conservatives in the PC Caucus.

The government's efforts to try and sell this kind of discrimination as protecting parental rights is misleading at best. Parental rights to opt out their kids from religious and human sexuality instruction within the school curriculum has been protected in Alberta for decades. It was not broke and did not need any socially destructive and retrograde fixing as Bill 44 has done.

So, here is a tip of my hat to my MLA Heather Klimchuk, and to Edmonton MLAs, Fred Horn and Doug Elniski. I say thanks for making this personal political statement by showing up at the Edmonton Pride Parade. I know it is too little too late for some, and they may be right but I think the political impact of Bill 44 is far from over. These PC MLAs, who showed up as the first Conservative MLAs to participate in the Edmonton Pride Parade, will help keep the concern over Bill 44 alive in the public and media mind. It will continue to fester in the minds of many Albertans. It has the potential to divide the PC Party itself on some fundamental principles of human rights and mutual respect. Ideally the Pride Parade attendance of Klimchuk, Horn and Elniski will continue to feed the public conversation about what kind of society Alberta is and what we aspire to become. I hope Albertans continue to consider if Bill 44 get us closer to or farther away from those societal goals and our greater aspirations.

Will the presence of the PC Pride Parade Trio make a difference within the PC Caucus and the PC Party? Perhaps, but only if progressive members in the PC Party continue the conversation at the constituency level and at the forthcoming AGM in November. Will they personally continue to press the other MLAs in Caucus and the Premier's office to repeal the Bill 44 opting out provisions, or at the very least not Proclaim them?

If progressives merely grumble under their breath and fail to take a stand, there are other questions that will have to be asked. Do the progressives still feel they still have a place in the PC Party post-Bill 44? Have they already moved on and left the PC Party? Or are they merely being compliant in this political exercise that is Bill 44 that normalizes and perpetuates a certain kind of discrimination in Alberta.

Nothing in the opting out provisions of Bill 44 serve the greater good. They sure do embolden reactionary social conservatives who are gearing up to press their social conservative political agenda with the new legal tools they can use against teachers and trustees. Those new legal tools at there thanks to Bill 44 which has created them.

The continuing political debate about the wisdom and necessity of Bill 44 now moves from the floor of the Legislature into the public sphere and into rank and file of the PC Party. The power structure in the Party wants to keep the Bill 44 controversy quiet and hope that it will "go away" by relying on the short memory of the Alberta voter to forget about it. Complacency and compliance amongst progressives in the PC Party, who chose to be quiet about their concerns over Bill 44, is what will allow a bad law to endure and be swept under the public policy carpet. That is no way to govern a province. We will soon know if there is any progressive character left in the PC Party - or not.

Poll Shows Carbon Tax Support Growing in Canada

Following up yesterdays post on the video of Michael Adam's remarks at the "Decoding Carbon Pricing" a global warming conference in Vancouver, the Environics poll he referenced is posted. It is part of their "Canadian Environmental Barometer" that they do monthly.

B.C. already has a carbon tax and Alberta has a de facto carbon tax of $15/tonne on heavy emitters but it is intensity based which does not reduce carbon in absolute terms. The Harper Conservatives have recently come forward and are suggesting a Cap and Trade model response to carbon emissions. I personally prefer a tax for reasons I will explore in subsequent posts.

Here is what the Environics poll found about attitudes towards a carbon tax. First B.C. residents initially and pre-recession, were supportive of a carbon tax with 54% Strongly or somewhat support for the tax. That combined support dropped to 40% in July 2008 as the recession was upon us, even though Harper was denying the fact. In May 2009 the B.C. combine support is back to 48% for this example of Premier Campbell leadership on climate change.

The support for a carbon tax in the rest of Canada is approaching 50% as of May 2009. The more interesting poll results are from Alberta and Saskatchewan, the home of oil sands a.k.a. "dirty oil" where support for a carbon tax is growing. In Alberta the Feb 08 combined support was 38% and 57% opposed. By July 08 support had fallen to 27% with opposition growing to 69%. Now the Alberta numbers are 44% in support with 53% opposed. The remarkable jump in Alberta support is 17% in less than a year and the recession is not over yet.

Saskatchewan has gone from an early supprrt of 42%, dropping to 29% and rebounding to 42% now.

I can do no better than Environics VP Keith Neuman who is quoted as saying "this latest survey demonstrates that it is premature to 'write off' carbon taxes as a failed climate change policy in Canada."

Harper is touting Cap and Trade in anticipation of a pending election - my betting in is a Nov 9/09 election BTW. I wonder if Harper is picking the right option for fighting climate change given this shift in sentiment about a carbon tax alternative. Keith Newman again: "Taxes of any kind will never be vote-winners, but the outcome of the recent B.B. provincial election validates Premier Gordon Campbell's decision to stick with a tax-based approach to fighting climate change in the face of serious opposition."

Will any federal party, other than the Greens, will have the courage and character to advocate for a carbon tax as policy in the next federal election? I wonder if this poll result will at least get the parties re-thinking their positions.

Michael Adams Talks Carbon Tax and New Governance

Michael Adams of Environics has new poll that shows support for a carbon tax is up 10% in BC since their election. Apparently support for a carbon tax is up across the country too. I am going to ask Michael for the data and blog on the results in more detail.


A carbon tax is such a better alternative to the Harper or Obama Cap&Trade concepts.


Here is a video of Michael speaking at a global warming conference in Vancouver earlier this week. Except for the info on support for carbon tax he is giving the same message I gave to School Trustees and ATA leaders last week.


The sound isn't so good but the content of Michael's presentation is awesome.

"The Earth Needs a New Operating System"

Here is a link to a website that carried Paul Hawken's Commencement Address to the Class of 2009 at the University of Portland. It is practical, and poetic and ponderful and all at the same time. I recommend that you read it. I guarantee it will engage you....

OK so "ponderful" is not a word, but after reading Hawken's address, it should be.

(Hat tip to @Parker Hogan, @AllieW and @Mike Soron for the lead to the link)

Alberta's Guide to Education is More Enlightened Than Bill 44

The ATA is responding with advice to teachers on what to do in the face of a Bill 44 complaint against them.

I love the excerpt from the Alberta "Guide to Education" they posted in this notice. It says:

"Studying controversial issues is important in preparing students to participate responsibly in a democratic society. Such study provides opportunities to develop the ability to think clearly, to reason logically, to open-mindedness and respectfully examine different points of view and to make sound judgements ....Controversial issues that have been anticipated by the teacher, and those that may arise incidentally during instruction,should be used by the teacher to promote critical inquiry and/or to teach thinking skills."

Isn't that a better world view of the kind of province we want Alberta to be? Doesn't this offer a more mature and inclusive society than the narrow-minded, institutionalized ignorance model of public education being promoted and defended by the Stelmach government in Bill 44 and now being entrenched in our so-called "Human Rights Act?"

The Day the Media Died

Here is a video that will amuse and bemuse you. It is clever, creative and perhaps more prescient than we would like it to be. It is about the demise of mainstream media advertising in the face of the Internet. The times are a-changin'. Word of mouth and the means tom make it happen in social media is an amazing shift that is just starting to resonate. Who knows where this will all end up!

Students in Medicine Hat Demonstrate Against Bill 44

The political fallout of Bill 44 continues and the opposition to it's darkness and danger grows. In the immortal words of Buffalo Springfield, "Something's happening here. What it is ain't exactly clear. Think it's time we stop, Hey what's that sound, Everybody look what's going down."

Well in Medicine Hat yesterday the "sound" about Bill 44 from 200 high school students was silence. A group of students from Crescent Heights High School in Medicine Hat acted as engaged citizens yesterday. They staged a protest by taping up their mouths with the message "I've been silenced by Bill 44." They are right at so many levels. The really cool thing is that a group of high school students get it about their role and responsibility as citizens. They are showing the rest of Alberta, by this protest, that we have to dust off our citizenship and re-engage in the political and public policy culture of our society.

Once again we see the power of social media in gathering like-minded people into a community to make their voices heard. Daniel Jessome and Dylan Beyak started a Facebook group and put up posters around the school about the protest. There is a very powerful Facebook group "Student Against Bill 44" that has over 7100 members as I write this. It started just 10 days ago encourage you to join.

These students rightly fear that their teachers "...will start holding back in class for fear of being hauled up in front of a human rights tribunal." They get it when they say "It's going to affect our education, because we're not going to have those sporadic discussions in class anymore." "If we can't talk about the issues of today, how are we supposed to learn anything" is another accurate observation by these student leaders.

Congratulations to the students of Crescent Heights High School in Medicine Hat. You are right. Your freedom of speech has been diminished by the backward thinking that is the basis of Bill 44. Your actions speak louder than your words ;-) Thanks for showing up and not opting out. You set a good example for the elected representative that form your government. Keep up the good work!

Lougheed Confirms Albertans Own the Oilsands But Says We Better Start Acting Like Owners.

With all the turmoil going on in the world - and in my province of Alberta in particular, to read the top Editorial from this morning's Globe and Mail was a gift of clarity and common sense.

Former Alberta Premier, Peter Lougheed cuts through the fog and frustration and states the fundamental truth for Albertans. That is that the citizens of Alberta are owners of the oilsands - not the energy industry. The energy industry companies who are developing the resource are welcome as tenants but only as tenants. This issue of Albertans needing to act like owners of the oilsands was the key message coming from the Royalty Review Panel Report last year as well.

The old-boys back-channel industry model of dealing with and influencing government is over and that will be confirmed this November when the Lobbyist Act finally get Proclaimed into law. The government has to rethink its mindset around oilsands too. It has pandered and capitulated to the industry demands on royalties and taxes and subsidies for generations but as the proxy holders for citizens, the government has to remember whose best interests they are supposed represent.

Shareholder interests can no long trump the interests of Albertans. If certain energy companies wants to leave, the resource is not going away. Others will come to replace them. We know there is lots of international interest to invest in Alberta's oilsands. the big selling features are that we have a know and enormous proven oilsands resource. We have a stable government with the rule of law, a strong investment climate and reasonable accountability controls and no corruption. We have the best proximity of any oil supplier to the largest energy market on the planet and an international treaty with that customer to provide some certainty in the marketplace.

The energy industry is in turmoil too, given the recession, restricted access to capital, volatile commodity prices and issues around cost control and royalties. I haven't even begun to talk about the new environmental standards they will face in the immediate future as we get into a post-Kyoto world soon to be emerging out of the Copenhagen Climate Change meetings come December.

Lougheed says Albertans, as owners, need to insist on a more "orderly development" as we come out of this recession. That means one project at a time to reduce costs, contain inflation and allow for adaptations for environmental and social impacts of oilsands development. Lougheed also says oilsands upgrading has to happen in Alberta, something we at Cambridge Strategies have been advocating as well.

Lougheed says Albertans also need to expand our oilsands markets into Asia and not just depend on the US market. This is another issue we at Cambridge Strategies have been pushing and actively working on. You can review the Cambridge Strategies work in our Economic Outlook 2009. We also have called for the GOA to invest in a merchantile upgrader in our recent Budget Analysis.

Lougheed laments that previous calls for a more sustainable and focused development of the oilsands "...have mostly fallen on deaf ears." The Editorial goes further to the heart of the matter stating: "There has been an unwillingness of the Alberta government, and not enough pressure from the public, to exercise greater restraint."

The old-boys of the energy sector have effectively convinced themselves that the new Royalty Regime is the NEP of the 21st century. They have vilified the Alberta government in the process. Both the industry and the government seems to have forgotten who really call the shots here, the Alberta citizenry as the owners of the resource. The attitude in the pubic is that both industry and government have forgotten their place and have lost their way in the need to create a responsible, reasonable and sustainable oilsands development approach.

The close of the Editorial is what was the most encouraging comment for a Monday morning. It goes to the governance of Alberta and to the roles and responsiblity of Albertans as owners of our natrual resources. Will Albertans take back the power of politicla governance and exercie their proper proprietray ownership obligations in the oilsands? Lougheed is hoepful and so am I.

Why Not Ask Bill 44 No-Show MLAs How They Would Have Voted

Edmonton Public School Board Trustee Sue Huff posted a list on her blog of the MLAs who did not show up for the Third Reading of Bill 44. It is an interesting grouping.

The question is why did they not show up? It was a "free vote" or was it? Was Bill 44 a matter for personal conscience or not? Was it just easier to duck out of the vote and go along to get along? How would they have voted had they been able or bothered enough to show up?

Since it was a free vote, would it be too much to ask of those MLAs who failed, refused or neglected to vote why they did not vote? Would it be too much to ask how they would have voted had they not been missing in action on this controversial Bill?

We elect people in a democracy to represent us but that will always be tempered by their own world view and personal beliefs and party discipline. I am fine, to a point. But when we have the Premier saying there is a free vote on Bill 44 and some MLAs don't show up to vote, that means we citizens can legitimately ask some questions of those MLAs. Most critical for we citizens it to know how and understand why they would have voted if they had been able or bothered to vote.

If your MLA did not vote and you are also curious about these questions, why not drop your MLA an email and ask why they didn't vote and if they were there to vote how they would have voted. I think that is vital information for progressives, especially those of us in the PC Party, to know and understand.