I have written a lot about the "culture war" going on between the Stelmach PCs and the Wildrose Alliance Party as they fight for the right (sic). That political drama is playing itself out but is only intriguing to media pundits and the chattering-class because of the conflict between the vulnerability of the PCs who are adrift and taking on water under Stelmach's leadership. Couple that with the quasi-charismatic libertarian leadership of Danielle Smith in front of the Wildrose Alliance Party which, to my mind, is a stagnating and stifling force for fundamentalist values. Hardly the stuff of an inclusive, modern, progressive and diverse society that is Alberta today and going forward.
THE POLITICAL CULTURE WARS ARE ON THE RIGHT AND THE LEFT:
The progressives are leaving the PCs and the social conservatives are waiting in the wings to reclaim their place as the value core of the Reform-Wildrose Alliance. Leaders of both parties are conventional to a fault that they try to control the message, coerce compliance with intimidation and use the power of position recklessly and abusively in order to sustain political dominance. These are the death throes of the old political system but do we have a viable alternative to take over?
On the other side of the tired old left versus right spectrum of political framing, we have some of the same culture war things happening to the Liberals and New Democrats as the same-old, same-old practice of conventional politics. This too is causing thoughtful people begin to leave the parties or at least go dormant and they don't show up to participate anymore. The "culture war" on the left comes from the Democratic Renewal Project as it pursues a political co-operation approach they claim to be "strategic." It is a scheme designed to not run NDP or Liberal candidates against each other in close constituencies. It is intended to eliminate vote splitting on the left and potentially electing someone other than a PC or WAP, who will split the right-wing vote next time.
This is an interesting idea if merely acquiring political power it your dominant purpose. It has the effect of reducing choice for citizens, adding to cynicism that politics is in reality all about parties and politicians and not the needs of the people. The DRP is an interesting exercise in conflict resolution and leadership negotiation because it comes from individual party members not the traditional party leadership or executive groups.
The NDP leader Brian Mason rejecting the idea out-of-hand and Liberal Leader David Swann being cold to tepid about the idea. The Liberals recently passed a vaguely worded resolution at their AGM around to pursue some idea of working with other progressives to try and change government in Alberta.
UNCERTAINTY PERVADES POLITICS, ECONOMICS, ENVIRONMENT AND SOCIETY:
All this shows the uncertain and unusual state of political flux these days in the province. Couple that with the on-going economic uncertainty as Albertans come to realize that yesterday's Alberta is gone and the new Alberta is still embryonic and emerging. We are not our of the recession woods yet but we have spent billions of borrowed dollars to tide us over the storm, leaving an unfair debt burden to future generations.
With climate change being the elephant in the room, Albertans know the future will not be all that friendly to our current energy dependent economic activities. We are realistic about the oil sands as a blessing and a burden as Albertans try to develop them responsibly and sustainably with the intent of using the wealth they generate to convert from a hydrocarbon economy to a more creative human and social capital economy.
There is a yearning and longing by Albertans for change - not just different politicians sitting in the Legislature with the same tired thinking and tedious gamesmanship. Albertans sense we need substantial and transformative change that is authentic and capable of thinking differently about long-term integrated inclusive governing. All we are being offered these days is conflicting personalities with minor variations of obsolete political themes that will ensure that Alberta will continue to squander it promise and potential.
The PCs are the party of the status quo, believing that once energy, agriculture and forest commodity prices return all will be well and they will be assured of continuing as the natural governing party of the province. The WAP is even scary than the status quo PCs because they are regressive in just about everything they believe in and in what they want to do to Alberta and Albertans. They mostly denying that the world has changed and believe if we merely returned to the 1950s value sets all will be well again. That reliance on the "Father Knows Best" attitude along with a social conservative faith-based fundamentalism and a contention that government just gets in the way is the other "viable" alternative we are being offered at the ballot box next time.
The Liberals and NDP are all too familiar and therefore get branded as conventional and inconsequential. As a result they get written off as incapable of transformative thinking and action and unskilled at governing. They are seen as appropriate as opposition but they are not a government in waiting, individually or collectively.
THE FUTURE IS NOT HOPELESS BUT IT IS CHALLENGING
So what is going to happen politically in the next Alberta as a consequence of the next election? I am seeing positive signs that citizens are catching on to the dire consequences if they stay out of participating in the political culture of the province. Early signs come from the slow but steady work being done by the budding Alberta Party as it gets organized to participate as a post-conventional alternative and reaches out to listen to Albertans in the Big Listen small groups.
I also see a resurgence of people stepping up as candidates for school boards and municipal elections coming this October. Many of these candidates are very young and novices when it comes to the conventional game of politics. But that is not a barrier to success because they are plugged into social networks and are campaigning online and making connections and that is a new formula for electoral success. Don Iveson, a young progressive candidate for city council, came out of nowhere in Edmonton in the last election. He soundly defeated a strong right-wing incumbent using face-to-face meetings, issue focused conversations and social media muscle blending the election techniques of the tried and true along with the new media connectivity. He came in third in popular vote as a brand new face and is a political force to be reckoned with.
I recently did a campaign school workshop for the Alberta School Boards Association for about 40 aspiring school board candidates from all over the province. They were all progressives in mindset, influentials in their communities and eager and realistic about what they were getting into. That was reassuring and reinforces my belief that real political change is about to happen and a different group of Albertans are seeing the need and will take the lead for this real change. They are not interested in just replacing one set of conventional politicians with another set who are merely different faces but have the same out-moded attitudes about politics, governing and pursuing the potential to transform the province.
I think Alberta is already into early stages of transformative change but it has not yet taken off. I see some serious turmoil bubbling just below the serene surface of the people in this province. The current and possible alternate government and business conservatives collude in their own best interests of sustaining power and exploiting short term economic gain.
We have lost confidence that the so-called Alberta Advantage was ever for the ordinary Albertan. The rising tide in Alberta's boom in the past years did raise all boats, only the yachts. We are not realizing the wealth from our non-renewable resources as the PCs and the WAP pander to the energy giants with subsidies and royalty give-aways as we close schools and lay off teachers. We see our environment neglected by corporations and our government being complacent and compliant in the decline through poor regulation and lax enforcement.
Some telling results of our recent research at Cambridge Strategies Inc. is what causes me to say we are at the trial head of a Renaissance, a Reformation, a Re-enlightenment and a Revolution in Alberta and it is and will all happen at once and in the next few years. When nearly 90% of Albertans say the oil sands are important to our prosperity and companies operating in the oil sands should be held liable for damages caused by their operations and 85% say those companies should be solely responsible for reclamation. We also know that there is not enough being done by our conventional politicians to deal with these issues.
Sooner than later corporations will come to realize their social license to operate comes from the governed - not the government. They will soon realize that expensive PR and advertising is no substitute for real performance in meeting environment and social obligations to Albertans which is required of them under lease and tenure agreements. While jobs are important we know there is no loyalty to local people by head offices when push comes to shove. We saw the intimidation power of these masters of the universe head offices energy types when they exercised some muscle on dependent communities when they did not like the new and absolutely reasonable recent increase in royalty rates. BTW, my sources tell me that our government has retreated so far from the reasonable royalty rate they passed that now we get less revenue from royalties than we did before the review. How sad is that!
HAVE ALBERTA'S POLITICIANS HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE?
Albertans have high expectations but not much is happening to satisfy those expectations. In fact there is less and less honesty, openness, transparency and accountability from government all the time to the point that Albertans are now very unimpressed with their politicians. Our recent research shows that 56% do not believe the Alberta-based Members of Parliament are satisfactorily representing Alberta's best interests in Ottawa and only 15% of Albertans believe our MPs are doing enough to protect Alberta's energy resources. The Stelmach government is no better off in the eyes of Albertan's. When asked if they were very satisfied with the Stelmach government only 12% Agreed or Completely Agreed while 46% Disagreed or Completely Disagreed.
Finally, in our research we asked "Who do you trust the most to responsibly manage Alberta's growth?" The results are astounding. Brian Mason (NDP Party) 4%, David Swann (Liberal Party) 9%, Danielle Smith (Wildrose Alliance Party) 19% EdStelmach (PC Party) 23% NONE OF THE ABOVE 45%. That is a formula for revolution and revolt in the making.
Albertans are waking up and returning to activitist and engaged citizenship - and it is about time! While we are becoming mad as hell and not going to take it any more I doubt we will ever go so far as in the scene from the 1976 movie Network. That said, it is eerie how relevant this mad as hell sentiment is to Alberta these days.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Friday, June 11, 2010
Alberta is Changing But for the Better or the Worse is the Question
"Why is this Man so Happy?" is an interesting "must read" from Avenue magazine's Edmonton edition on Mark Anielski, the award winning best selling author of "The Economics of Happiness."
Mark is a good friend and recently pitched in at the last minute at the Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta public dialogues in Edmonton and Calgary when David Peat became ill and could not travel from Italy. He also added to the dialogue at the symposium on the same theme with Gwynne Dyer and Scott Murray. Cambridge Strategies Inc. was please to sponsor this event with the ATA, Literacy Alberta, the University of Calgary and the four ATA locals in Edmonton and Calgary.
One of Mark's key messages has been that Genuine Progress Indicators are so much more relevant than old fashioned misleading Gross Domestic Product rates for measuring the stuff that really matters to individuals, communities and societies - and that is its well-being!
Mark noted at his presentation at the Learning Our Way event that happiness is 50% is genetic, 10% is education and capacity and 40% as a function of the quality of personal relationships. Interesting mix of influences on one's happiness and something to work with for sure. Seems to me we, as a society, better starting working on our personal and community capacity for people to relate better with each other and more often too if we are going to enhance our well being as individuals and groups and communities.
Mark's work in Edmonton in 2009 charted 49 genuine progress indicators. His findings included that "Overall, the results of the well-being assessment show that Edmonton's overall state of well-being is in a health and improving condition, though there are some economic, social and environmental conditions that need attention, [such as] rising income inequality, rising levels of family disputes, loss of urban agricultural land..." to name a few. We are well positioned for progress in this city but we can't rest on laurels.
Albertans are finding themselves on unfamiliar moving ground in the political, economic, social and environmental aspects of life in our province. It is time to re-evaluate what we think is important - and how we measure success. Our research at Cambridge Strategies shows a yearning and longing for change but an uncertainty of how to get there and what "there" looks like except it must be very different than the "here and now" because the latter is not working. There is general feeling of dismay over the lack of leadership politically, economically and socially. There is more apparent leadership in environmental aspects but it is either too aggressive or too anemic. There is a feeling that we lack viable alternatives to choose from to enable and empower the transformational change that many people aspire to pursue. Mark is way ahead of the pack on that new path towards that transformational aspiration, both personally and professionally.
As we go into the red zone of the October municipal elections in Alberta, it is perhaps timely for us a citizens to reflect on what make the "good life." It is timely to rethink what it is we ought to strive for in pursuit of the good life and what we need to do as individuals and in society to achieve it. Then we can ask our politicians - incumbent and aspiring, what they see that needs to be done in public policy to enhance our overall well-being.
Mark' s book "The Economics of Happiness" is a good primer to help being to answer those questions. It will help you find some better questions to ponder while you move along the pathway to well-being and happiness. I recommend it highly to anyone feeling anxiety about the future, uncertain about the present and no desire to return to the harsh unjust realities of the past.
Mark is a good friend and recently pitched in at the last minute at the Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta public dialogues in Edmonton and Calgary when David Peat became ill and could not travel from Italy. He also added to the dialogue at the symposium on the same theme with Gwynne Dyer and Scott Murray. Cambridge Strategies Inc. was please to sponsor this event with the ATA, Literacy Alberta, the University of Calgary and the four ATA locals in Edmonton and Calgary.
One of Mark's key messages has been that Genuine Progress Indicators are so much more relevant than old fashioned misleading Gross Domestic Product rates for measuring the stuff that really matters to individuals, communities and societies - and that is its well-being!
Mark noted at his presentation at the Learning Our Way event that happiness is 50% is genetic, 10% is education and capacity and 40% as a function of the quality of personal relationships. Interesting mix of influences on one's happiness and something to work with for sure. Seems to me we, as a society, better starting working on our personal and community capacity for people to relate better with each other and more often too if we are going to enhance our well being as individuals and groups and communities.
Mark's work in Edmonton in 2009 charted 49 genuine progress indicators. His findings included that "Overall, the results of the well-being assessment show that Edmonton's overall state of well-being is in a health and improving condition, though there are some economic, social and environmental conditions that need attention, [such as] rising income inequality, rising levels of family disputes, loss of urban agricultural land..." to name a few. We are well positioned for progress in this city but we can't rest on laurels.
Albertans are finding themselves on unfamiliar moving ground in the political, economic, social and environmental aspects of life in our province. It is time to re-evaluate what we think is important - and how we measure success. Our research at Cambridge Strategies shows a yearning and longing for change but an uncertainty of how to get there and what "there" looks like except it must be very different than the "here and now" because the latter is not working. There is general feeling of dismay over the lack of leadership politically, economically and socially. There is more apparent leadership in environmental aspects but it is either too aggressive or too anemic. There is a feeling that we lack viable alternatives to choose from to enable and empower the transformational change that many people aspire to pursue. Mark is way ahead of the pack on that new path towards that transformational aspiration, both personally and professionally.
As we go into the red zone of the October municipal elections in Alberta, it is perhaps timely for us a citizens to reflect on what make the "good life." It is timely to rethink what it is we ought to strive for in pursuit of the good life and what we need to do as individuals and in society to achieve it. Then we can ask our politicians - incumbent and aspiring, what they see that needs to be done in public policy to enhance our overall well-being.
Mark' s book "The Economics of Happiness" is a good primer to help being to answer those questions. It will help you find some better questions to ponder while you move along the pathway to well-being and happiness. I recommend it highly to anyone feeling anxiety about the future, uncertain about the present and no desire to return to the harsh unjust realities of the past.
Thursday, June 10, 2010
New Kids on the Political Block Event Shows a Yearning for Real Change in Alberta's Political Culture
Congratulations to Intervivos and Zohreh Saher in particular for creating the New Kids on the Political Block event yesterday. Thanks also to Walter Schwabe at fusedlogic for covering the event with live streaming. Special thanks also to Danielle Smith, Leader of the Wildrose Alliance Party and Chima Nkemdirim, the Chairman of the Alberta Party Big Listen project. Then we need to thank the in person and online audience for attending and sharing their thoughts and concerns about the future of Alberta.
You can watch the event by clicking here but be forewarned - this is the entire event, not an edited version, so get a beer and enjoy some political conversation that is respectful, informative and meaningful.
In my quest to help Albertans dust off their citizenship and re-engage in politics and political culture, I get encouraged by these citizen based efforts. The need to fix the democratic deficit in Alberta is becoming more of an issue for many progressive people, especially those who take the time and apply their talents to organize and participate in these kinds of events. It is all aligned with the continuing spirit of Reboot Alberta where people are retaking Control, creating Alternatives to the status quo and Deleting the useless and harmful parts of old-style command and control, authority driven, coercive and power based adversarial politics of the past.
We need a new progressive, respectful, effective, curious and capable political culture that thrives on diversity and difference. I see an Alberta renaissance, reformation, re-enlightenment and cultural revolution all happening at the same time. It is coming none too soon either if we are going to continue to progress, grow and thrive as a province.
You can watch the event by clicking here but be forewarned - this is the entire event, not an edited version, so get a beer and enjoy some political conversation that is respectful, informative and meaningful.
In my quest to help Albertans dust off their citizenship and re-engage in politics and political culture, I get encouraged by these citizen based efforts. The need to fix the democratic deficit in Alberta is becoming more of an issue for many progressive people, especially those who take the time and apply their talents to organize and participate in these kinds of events. It is all aligned with the continuing spirit of Reboot Alberta where people are retaking Control, creating Alternatives to the status quo and Deleting the useless and harmful parts of old-style command and control, authority driven, coercive and power based adversarial politics of the past.
We need a new progressive, respectful, effective, curious and capable political culture that thrives on diversity and difference. I see an Alberta renaissance, reformation, re-enlightenment and cultural revolution all happening at the same time. It is coming none too soon either if we are going to continue to progress, grow and thrive as a province.
Thursday, June 03, 2010
Grizzly Bears Declared an Endangered Species in Alberta
The province of Alberta has finally made this important decision to designate grizzly bears as an endangered species in our province.
This is a very important policy step and one that is very aligned with the values of Albertans. We at Cambridge Strategies have done a number of conjoint studies on forestry and oil sands development issues dating back to 2005. In every case a significant value driver in the hearts and minds of Albertans has been habitat protection.
The industries like forestry, conventional oil and gas and oil sands are all becoming aware, and sometimes painfully aware, that their social license to continue to operate as our tenants on the lands owned by Albertans requires a higher degree of responsible stewardship than in the past. Albertans are very aware of the need for a long term view when it comes to dealing with both renewable resources like forestry and non-renewable resource like oil, gas and oil sands.
Forestry and oil sands developers do take a long term view of their responsibilities be it reforestation or land reclamation in the case of oil sands based disturbances. I like the Alberta forest operators and believe they by and large have the right corporate values to justify their social licence to operate in our forests. It was not always that way but with effective pressure from environmentalists and public opinion, they have seen the light. Now the forestry sector is reformed and worthy of our respect as our tenants. Unfortunately due to mountain pine beetle, climate change and market volatility, they are having a tough time making it with the conventional business model.
The conventional oil and gas sector also has a duty to reclaim lands from abandoned well sites, seismic lines and roadways but they are all too often less than diligent in fulfilling these duties. They get enormous subsidies and royalty relief but still don't seem to understand that they are in danger of losing any modicum of public confidence in their integrity as respected operators entitled to responsibly exploit Alberta's natural resources. As we see reduced market demands coming, unless the conventional energy sector starts to see the writing on the wall they will be the first to be pressured out of business by public opinion.
The move by the government of Alberta to designate grizzlies as endangered has been a longtime coming but it is hopefully not too late to protect this animal. Biodiversity and habitat protection are highly ranked and core values for Albertans. Congratulations to the Stelmach government for making this move and with luck they will move to force industry for some expanded and enhanced land reclamation to provide a better habitat so these bears can thrive again.
This is a very important policy step and one that is very aligned with the values of Albertans. We at Cambridge Strategies have done a number of conjoint studies on forestry and oil sands development issues dating back to 2005. In every case a significant value driver in the hearts and minds of Albertans has been habitat protection.
The industries like forestry, conventional oil and gas and oil sands are all becoming aware, and sometimes painfully aware, that their social license to continue to operate as our tenants on the lands owned by Albertans requires a higher degree of responsible stewardship than in the past. Albertans are very aware of the need for a long term view when it comes to dealing with both renewable resources like forestry and non-renewable resource like oil, gas and oil sands.
Forestry and oil sands developers do take a long term view of their responsibilities be it reforestation or land reclamation in the case of oil sands based disturbances. I like the Alberta forest operators and believe they by and large have the right corporate values to justify their social licence to operate in our forests. It was not always that way but with effective pressure from environmentalists and public opinion, they have seen the light. Now the forestry sector is reformed and worthy of our respect as our tenants. Unfortunately due to mountain pine beetle, climate change and market volatility, they are having a tough time making it with the conventional business model.
The conventional oil and gas sector also has a duty to reclaim lands from abandoned well sites, seismic lines and roadways but they are all too often less than diligent in fulfilling these duties. They get enormous subsidies and royalty relief but still don't seem to understand that they are in danger of losing any modicum of public confidence in their integrity as respected operators entitled to responsibly exploit Alberta's natural resources. As we see reduced market demands coming, unless the conventional energy sector starts to see the writing on the wall they will be the first to be pressured out of business by public opinion.
The move by the government of Alberta to designate grizzlies as endangered has been a longtime coming but it is hopefully not too late to protect this animal. Biodiversity and habitat protection are highly ranked and core values for Albertans. Congratulations to the Stelmach government for making this move and with luck they will move to force industry for some expanded and enhanced land reclamation to provide a better habitat so these bears can thrive again.
The Mayerthorpe Fallen Four Relay/Marathon Runs June 20 & 21
Here is a community based event that has a poignant aspect. The Fallen 4 Relay/Marathon goes Sunday June 21 from Mayehorpe to Whitecourt. There is also a Kids Marathon and RCMP Fun/Run on Saturday June 20. These runs are a memorial in honour of The Fallen Four RCMP (Constables Peter Schiemann, Leo Johnston, Anthony Gordon, Brock Myrol) who were killed in the line of duty in Mayerthorpe in 2005.
The community of Mayerthorpe has responded to this tragedy in very positive ways. They raised the funds and build the Fallen Four Memorial that has thousands of visitors a year who come to pay their respects. Now they have partnered with their neighbour Whitecourt and host this relay and marathon again in the honour of the Fallen Four.
In my work with the Grande Alberta Economic Region I have had the opportunity to visit Mayerthorpe many time and to get to know the community and many of the people who live there. This Fallen Four Marathon is just another example of the strength of character of this community and the positive energy and imagination of its engaged citizens.
I encourage anyone interested to sign up for these events and get to know Mayerthorpe and Whitecourt communities and the people who make these communities great - and support a good cause in the process.
The community of Mayerthorpe has responded to this tragedy in very positive ways. They raised the funds and build the Fallen Four Memorial that has thousands of visitors a year who come to pay their respects. Now they have partnered with their neighbour Whitecourt and host this relay and marathon again in the honour of the Fallen Four.
In my work with the Grande Alberta Economic Region I have had the opportunity to visit Mayerthorpe many time and to get to know the community and many of the people who live there. This Fallen Four Marathon is just another example of the strength of character of this community and the positive energy and imagination of its engaged citizens.
I encourage anyone interested to sign up for these events and get to know Mayerthorpe and Whitecourt communities and the people who make these communities great - and support a good cause in the process.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Do Donations Show That Power Begets Power in Alberta Politics?
The front page story in today's Edmonton Journal by Archie McLean on Lobbyist's contributions to political parties is the kind of journalism a fear we would lose with the demise of the traditional media. The story is just the kind of thing the Lobbyist Registry was supposed to bring forward. It is the kind of transparency and accountability such legislation intends to help regular citizens know and better understand how the machinery of politics, and yes even democracy, actually works in Alberta.
I have no issues with the story and I am not surprised by the sources or levels of the donations. I don't think that level of contribution is enough to buy any politician. But is does buy access. For example, big industry gets their phone calls returned from government, and even opposition parties. I expect Brian Mason of the NDP is quick to respond to big unions when they phone. Again I have no issues with that.
The startling fact is the concentration of donations to the current government and the picayune level of support for the Liberals and NDP. The Wildrose is pretty good at fundraising but will be secretive about the sources and amounts when it suits their political purposes...like the lack of disclosure of who paid for Danielle Smith's leadership campaign. Too bad we can't force that kind of disclosure under the Lobbyist Act. There are no rules running those gong shows that that private process inside political parties actually selects the small group of folks who could be Premier.
What is of concern is what is said and by whom for what ends when contributors come calling on politicians? Is it all done behind closed doors - or on the golf course? If there confidentiality for good reasons or secrecy pure political reasons? When that happens we get a sick system and at best casual corruption. I don't think any of that is actually happening in Alberta so don't misunderstand. It is like the MPs expenses being audited by the Auditor General.. Of course they should be, just as we, as citizens, have a right to know who is trying to influence government. Jaffer has proven the need for that kind of sanitizing in spades.
The Lobbyist Act in Alberta is a late addition to an effort about applying more integrity to the Alberta political culture. It is a tepid toe in the water of more openness, accountability and transparency in who influences government and politics and how they do it. It is at least a start and when the review of the legislation comes up in a few years I trust the system will become even more honest and open about how democracy is done and ought to be done in our Alberta.
For the record, I am a registered lobbyist and make political donations but only modestly. I have found access to politicians in Alberta not to be a problem and I don't think the money contributed makes any difference. In fact since I quit the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta last year, my access to the political and administrative levels of the provincial government has never been better. Go figure.
I have no issues with the story and I am not surprised by the sources or levels of the donations. I don't think that level of contribution is enough to buy any politician. But is does buy access. For example, big industry gets their phone calls returned from government, and even opposition parties. I expect Brian Mason of the NDP is quick to respond to big unions when they phone. Again I have no issues with that.
The startling fact is the concentration of donations to the current government and the picayune level of support for the Liberals and NDP. The Wildrose is pretty good at fundraising but will be secretive about the sources and amounts when it suits their political purposes...like the lack of disclosure of who paid for Danielle Smith's leadership campaign. Too bad we can't force that kind of disclosure under the Lobbyist Act. There are no rules running those gong shows that that private process inside political parties actually selects the small group of folks who could be Premier.
What is of concern is what is said and by whom for what ends when contributors come calling on politicians? Is it all done behind closed doors - or on the golf course? If there confidentiality for good reasons or secrecy pure political reasons? When that happens we get a sick system and at best casual corruption. I don't think any of that is actually happening in Alberta so don't misunderstand. It is like the MPs expenses being audited by the Auditor General.. Of course they should be, just as we, as citizens, have a right to know who is trying to influence government. Jaffer has proven the need for that kind of sanitizing in spades.
The Lobbyist Act in Alberta is a late addition to an effort about applying more integrity to the Alberta political culture. It is a tepid toe in the water of more openness, accountability and transparency in who influences government and politics and how they do it. It is at least a start and when the review of the legislation comes up in a few years I trust the system will become even more honest and open about how democracy is done and ought to be done in our Alberta.
For the record, I am a registered lobbyist and make political donations but only modestly. I have found access to politicians in Alberta not to be a problem and I don't think the money contributed makes any difference. In fact since I quit the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta last year, my access to the political and administrative levels of the provincial government has never been better. Go figure.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
What Will Albertans Get From Yet Another Royalty Rollback?
I wanted to do a blog post today on the latest retreat from responsible royalty rates by the Stelmach government. My research made me realize that Don Braid of the Calgary Herald more than captures my response.
The short term thinking of generating activity by single minded policy approaches is hindering integrated thoughtful policy approaches. We know from our research and the early findings of The Big Listen by the Alberta Party that Albertans want a public policy approach that has a longer term view. We can't ignore the ecological and social impacts of shallow, simple-minded and myopic approaches to competitiveness that is exemplified by a constant foregoing of rents from non-renewable resources.
These resource royalties rents are one time chances to grasp the intergenerational and birthright benefits of our kids and their kids. We are being told our government can't afford to pay teachers according to the contracts we negotiated with them but we can walk away from another $1.5B of royalties because why? More drilling activity in more marginal areas? How much more have the companies who are doing this more drilling committed to do as a result of the royalty give-away? Are there any guarantees from them in this deal? What about a condition of a rollback that these companies first clean up and reclaim some of the old wellsites, roads and seismic lines they no longer need so wildlife can return to these areas?
We are not well governed and the Wildrose would be worse. They appear to be already owned and controlled by the conventional energy sector. These guys are so cloaked in anonymity that they will not even disclose their contributions to the leader of that party. We need a viable political alternative in Alberta that has Integrity, is Honest with us, truly Accountable, actually Transparent and who sees Stewardship of public assets and resources in the greater public of all Albertans interest as its job.
The short term thinking of generating activity by single minded policy approaches is hindering integrated thoughtful policy approaches. We know from our research and the early findings of The Big Listen by the Alberta Party that Albertans want a public policy approach that has a longer term view. We can't ignore the ecological and social impacts of shallow, simple-minded and myopic approaches to competitiveness that is exemplified by a constant foregoing of rents from non-renewable resources.
These resource royalties rents are one time chances to grasp the intergenerational and birthright benefits of our kids and their kids. We are being told our government can't afford to pay teachers according to the contracts we negotiated with them but we can walk away from another $1.5B of royalties because why? More drilling activity in more marginal areas? How much more have the companies who are doing this more drilling committed to do as a result of the royalty give-away? Are there any guarantees from them in this deal? What about a condition of a rollback that these companies first clean up and reclaim some of the old wellsites, roads and seismic lines they no longer need so wildlife can return to these areas?
We are not well governed and the Wildrose would be worse. They appear to be already owned and controlled by the conventional energy sector. These guys are so cloaked in anonymity that they will not even disclose their contributions to the leader of that party. We need a viable political alternative in Alberta that has Integrity, is Honest with us, truly Accountable, actually Transparent and who sees Stewardship of public assets and resources in the greater public of all Albertans interest as its job.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Do You Believe Calgary is #1 Eco-City in the WORLD?
Mercer's Quality of Living and Eco-City survey of 221 cities world wide does not likely include Edmonton. Not sure but if it were to find Calgary at the top ranking Eco-city in the world something is fishy about the survey. Calgary has lots of merits but beyond the public transit system it is hardly a top ranked eco-city. It has the largest number of cars per capita in Canada and is urban sprawl writ large...and that is still the norm in Cowtown with 100% of its growth in the suburbs.
Mercer says it used the following criteria for eco-ranking. Water availability, water potability, waste removal, sewage, air pollution and traffic congestion. Water availability is a serious problem for the future of Calgary. In fact there was a restriction put on industrial use of water a few years ago. Calgary suffers from water shortages and with the growth it has endured, that will only become more critical. Only recently has Calgary metered water and that met with serious resistance I understand. Quality of water in Alberta is excellent almost everywhere with notable exceptions. Waste removal and recycling are not big items in the Calgary civic culture - at least not compared to Edmonton. Edmonton has a long standing and extensive blue box recycling system and city owned composting plant and even recycles Christmas trees. As for traffic congestion with the largest per capita car population and the Deerfoot Trail rush hour "parking lot" and narrow downtown street system, traffic congestion is a serious problem for Calgary.
This is not a knock against Calgary. It is very livable city with lots going for it. But to rank it as #1 Eco-City in the WORLD? That stretched credulity. Mercer needs to broaden and deepen its Eco-City criteria and look to other locales for comparisons - especially in Canada.
Mercer says it used the following criteria for eco-ranking. Water availability, water potability, waste removal, sewage, air pollution and traffic congestion. Water availability is a serious problem for the future of Calgary. In fact there was a restriction put on industrial use of water a few years ago. Calgary suffers from water shortages and with the growth it has endured, that will only become more critical. Only recently has Calgary metered water and that met with serious resistance I understand. Quality of water in Alberta is excellent almost everywhere with notable exceptions. Waste removal and recycling are not big items in the Calgary civic culture - at least not compared to Edmonton. Edmonton has a long standing and extensive blue box recycling system and city owned composting plant and even recycles Christmas trees. As for traffic congestion with the largest per capita car population and the Deerfoot Trail rush hour "parking lot" and narrow downtown street system, traffic congestion is a serious problem for Calgary.
This is not a knock against Calgary. It is very livable city with lots going for it. But to rank it as #1 Eco-City in the WORLD? That stretched credulity. Mercer needs to broaden and deepen its Eco-City criteria and look to other locales for comparisons - especially in Canada.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the learning revolution! | Video on TED.com
Sir Ken Robinson: Bring on the learning revolution! Video on TED.com
If you are interested in the future and what we need to change to adapt and enjoy the revolutions that are all around us you will want to watch Ken Robinson at TED this year.
If you enjoy this then you will want to hear the speakers (including Gwynne Dyer) and participate in the public dialogues happening May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta." You can learn more and buy tickets ($10) online at http://www.learningourway.ca/ Ticket sales end Noon on Friday May 28 so you will want to act now.
My firm, Cambridge Strategies Inc is a sponsor of this event along with the ATA and Literacy Alberta. Hope to meet you in Calgary or Edmonton
If you are interested in the future and what we need to change to adapt and enjoy the revolutions that are all around us you will want to watch Ken Robinson at TED this year.
If you enjoy this then you will want to hear the speakers (including Gwynne Dyer) and participate in the public dialogues happening May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta." You can learn more and buy tickets ($10) online at http://www.learningourway.ca/ Ticket sales end Noon on Friday May 28 so you will want to act now.
My firm, Cambridge Strategies Inc is a sponsor of this event along with the ATA and Literacy Alberta. Hope to meet you in Calgary or Edmonton
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Alberta Law Society Polls on Legal Services Quality and Value for Money
This is not my usual blog post stuff but as a lawyer I found it interesting! Looks like the days of lawyer jokes are pretty much past when you see recent Law Society of Alberta survey results. This blog post is just a repeat of the summary of findings I received as a member of the Law Society of Alberta. The actual poll results will be out tomorrow and available at http://www.lawsociety.ab.ca/. I hope that brings more clarity to the findings and afford an opportunty for some more indepth conclusions.
It has been an axiom for a long time that people do not like lawyers but they like their lawyer. This survey seems to address the last half of this question but not the first part so much. Here are some findings that Rod Jerke QC, the President of the Law Society says, “…show(s) that the public is generally satisfied with the service and value they receive.”
The Law Society notes the relationship between the delivery of legal services and the regulation and governance of the legal profession. This poll is said to “give valuable insight on the reputation of the legal profession and the high levels of satisfaction experienced by consumers of legal services.” ON the down side the survey showed “consumers” were concerned about availability of legal services to low income Albertans and the “perception of the costs of legal service.”
Next step is to survey lawyers but it is not clear how that will relate to the consumer survey. I have to say I find it strange to be referring to clients as consumers but many legal services have become commodities so I guess it makes sense. I also hope the actual survey breaks down the results in terms of types of legal services and geographically. Are divorce “consumers” at the same satisfaction levels as real estate “consumer?” I am curious to see if there is any difference between rural and urban and/or Edmonton and Calgary perceptions.
So here is a smattering of the poll results. There are 78% very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the legal service provided. I wonder what values were attributed by the public to their being very or somewhat satisfied. Is somewhat satisfied less than 5 but more than 1 on a 10 point scale?
As for value for money spent on lawyers only 34% who were polled say they received “very good value.” Then some 37% said they received “somewhat good value.” What does somewhat mean and what values were used to determine that answer?
How do you find a lawyer? This area has some more value based substance to it. Referral from another person – which means word of mouth, was the key factor for 41% of poll participants. Reputation was important to 43 % but what values and factors constitute reputation? Glad you asked! Here is where we got some useful information about what guide and drives lawyer selection. Legal training and professional credentials worked for 30%. Standing, whatever that means other than being subject to the Code of Ethics was crucial for 26%. Personal knowledge and relationship with a lawyer drove 25% while cost and proximity/access issues drove hiring decisions for 23%.
I applaud the Law Society for doing research on public perceptions on various aspects of legal services. But opinion polls are not of much value in figuring what really guide and drives the public’s state of mind in reaching such decisions. They are better than focus groups but not much better. The more effective way is to use discrete choice modeling or conjoint techniques to force participants to make trade off and choices between various values that they use to measure what is important to them about legal services.
I need to know more about the actual survey questions and methodology before I can comment further. Opinion polls are becoming notoriously inaccurate and when terms like “somewhat satisfied” is so vague that it is dangerous to attribute too much positive or negative results to those responses.
There is no doubt some useful information here for lawyers but it is far from being conclusive evidence to make sound a judgement and draw a decisive conclusion about what the consuming public thinks about the quality of legal service and the value for money received.
It has been an axiom for a long time that people do not like lawyers but they like their lawyer. This survey seems to address the last half of this question but not the first part so much. Here are some findings that Rod Jerke QC, the President of the Law Society says, “…show(s) that the public is generally satisfied with the service and value they receive.”
The Law Society notes the relationship between the delivery of legal services and the regulation and governance of the legal profession. This poll is said to “give valuable insight on the reputation of the legal profession and the high levels of satisfaction experienced by consumers of legal services.” ON the down side the survey showed “consumers” were concerned about availability of legal services to low income Albertans and the “perception of the costs of legal service.”
Next step is to survey lawyers but it is not clear how that will relate to the consumer survey. I have to say I find it strange to be referring to clients as consumers but many legal services have become commodities so I guess it makes sense. I also hope the actual survey breaks down the results in terms of types of legal services and geographically. Are divorce “consumers” at the same satisfaction levels as real estate “consumer?” I am curious to see if there is any difference between rural and urban and/or Edmonton and Calgary perceptions.
So here is a smattering of the poll results. There are 78% very satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the legal service provided. I wonder what values were attributed by the public to their being very or somewhat satisfied. Is somewhat satisfied less than 5 but more than 1 on a 10 point scale?
As for value for money spent on lawyers only 34% who were polled say they received “very good value.” Then some 37% said they received “somewhat good value.” What does somewhat mean and what values were used to determine that answer?
How do you find a lawyer? This area has some more value based substance to it. Referral from another person – which means word of mouth, was the key factor for 41% of poll participants. Reputation was important to 43 % but what values and factors constitute reputation? Glad you asked! Here is where we got some useful information about what guide and drives lawyer selection. Legal training and professional credentials worked for 30%. Standing, whatever that means other than being subject to the Code of Ethics was crucial for 26%. Personal knowledge and relationship with a lawyer drove 25% while cost and proximity/access issues drove hiring decisions for 23%.
I applaud the Law Society for doing research on public perceptions on various aspects of legal services. But opinion polls are not of much value in figuring what really guide and drives the public’s state of mind in reaching such decisions. They are better than focus groups but not much better. The more effective way is to use discrete choice modeling or conjoint techniques to force participants to make trade off and choices between various values that they use to measure what is important to them about legal services.
I need to know more about the actual survey questions and methodology before I can comment further. Opinion polls are becoming notoriously inaccurate and when terms like “somewhat satisfied” is so vague that it is dangerous to attribute too much positive or negative results to those responses.
There is no doubt some useful information here for lawyers but it is far from being conclusive evidence to make sound a judgement and draw a decisive conclusion about what the consuming public thinks about the quality of legal service and the value for money received.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Some Facets of My Focus These Days
Lots happening in my cyberworld.http://ken-chapman.blogspot.com/2010/05/alberta-needs-viable-political.html
As the publisher of Satya Das' "Green Oil" I was delighted to see Stephen Murgatroyd write a blog post on the subject "Making Green Oil Happen."
Marshall Boyd did a blog post following up on my post on the Democratic Renewal Project suggesting limiting choice for voters may split votes but limited voices and points of view at elections is no way to bolster participation in democracy.
Just got off the phone with David Peat the Quantum Physicist who was a contemporary of David Bohm working on reconciling quantum theory with relativity. He now runs the Pari Centre for New Learning in Tuscany Italy and spends his thoughtspace on things from Carl Jung to Synchronicity to Art and Artist and his encounters with Blackfoot culture in Alberta. He is speaking at public dialogues in Edmonton and Calgary and symposium I am working on at the end of the month on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta" I expect he will expand on the themes in his book on "Gentle Action: Bringing Creative Change to a Turbulent World."
Then I have been in fascinating Reboot Alberta based conversations with Dr. Haley Simons on the possibilities of a Creative Alberta and the 2010 World Creativity Forum in Oklahoman City this fall and the thought of making Alberta the next and 13th "District of Creativity."
I have a rich and full life and now I have to get back to work.
As the publisher of Satya Das' "Green Oil" I was delighted to see Stephen Murgatroyd write a blog post on the subject "Making Green Oil Happen."
Marshall Boyd did a blog post following up on my post on the Democratic Renewal Project suggesting limiting choice for voters may split votes but limited voices and points of view at elections is no way to bolster participation in democracy.
Just got off the phone with David Peat the Quantum Physicist who was a contemporary of David Bohm working on reconciling quantum theory with relativity. He now runs the Pari Centre for New Learning in Tuscany Italy and spends his thoughtspace on things from Carl Jung to Synchronicity to Art and Artist and his encounters with Blackfoot culture in Alberta. He is speaking at public dialogues in Edmonton and Calgary and symposium I am working on at the end of the month on the theme "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta" I expect he will expand on the themes in his book on "Gentle Action: Bringing Creative Change to a Turbulent World."
Then I have been in fascinating Reboot Alberta based conversations with Dr. Haley Simons on the possibilities of a Creative Alberta and the 2010 World Creativity Forum in Oklahoman City this fall and the thought of making Alberta the next and 13th "District of Creativity."
I have a rich and full life and now I have to get back to work.
Monday, May 17, 2010
CBC Wildrose Show is Changing its Name
Here is a link to the audio of the CBC Radio One session I did today for Wildrose. BTW the program is changing its name to Alberta at Noon. Good move. The Wildrose name is too political now that we have the Wildrose Alliance Party and, besides, it is too quaint a title for the kind of audience the program attracts.
For context on this radio bit you may want to read this blog post today on the Democratic Renewal Project. This is what got the CBC interested.
For context on this radio bit you may want to read this blog post today on the Democratic Renewal Project. This is what got the CBC interested.
Alberta Needs Viable Political Alternatives to Govern, Not Just a Bigger Opposition.
I was well intentioned to go to the Alberta Liberal convention as an observer and blogger this weekend but yard work and family chores took precedent. So what I sense is only what I read in the MSM and the headlines went from Warren Kinsella telling Alberta Liberals to get “mean and nasty” and rant against the social and fiscal fundamentalist forces on the dysfunctional right. The next day we see a policy resolution passing that says play strategically with the New Democrats under the guise of democratic renewal.
All Political Parties are in Decline:
It seems to have been an interesting time as the Alberta Liberals and New Democratic political parties are all trying to find their way forward as viable political options. This is not that different from the Progressive Conservative party who is heading into drift and despondency - but with cash to burn. It also seems to me that all conventional political parties are fading from relevance as they become trite, tribal and tedious to most Albertans. Even the recent “phenominal growth” of Wildrose Alliance is proving to be just so much media manufactured manipulation rather than a broad-based and authentic citizen re-engagement in Alberta politics. Recent polls show that without constant media coverage providing the “oxygen” to draw attention to the WAP, they are just another listless and languishing non-viable alternative to real change from the governing PCs. The progressives remain disengaged and disillusioned about being listened to by "their" government.
The Need for Democratic Renewal
I have a great deal of respect for the leaders of the Democratic Renewal Project but have to say the model they propose for strategic voting is an erosion of choice and a dilution of democracy not a salvation for democracy. The DRP idea is essentially for Liberals and New Democrats to be “strategic” in certain constituencies where PCs have had small margins of victory. By not having Liberals and New Democrats run against each other and spit the vote the theory is more opposition members will be elected. The math the DRP has done shows that we get a bigger – but not necessarily a better – opposition. That is not good enough. We need viable alternative to the current political culture of feigned consensus if we are going to renew democracy and restore the public’s confidence in the political culture of the province.
Trying to manipulate the size of the conventional political party’s pieces of a dangerously declining rates of political participation pie is no way to strengthen democracy. We need real choices and effective viable alternatives for us to elect to form government. We need to enhance our democracy by having viable alternatives to assume office not just a bigger but not necessarily better opposition. We need to keep government honest, accountable and transparent by having alternatives not just oppositions.
Time to Design Some New Viable Governing Alternatives
The first step to this end is to stop the one-party-rule-by- default paradigm that is Alberta for so many years. In the one-party state citizens get taken for granted, or worse. The groups who do much of the work of government in the volunteer and not-for-profit sectors get intimidated, abused and bullied by the political powers. The behind the scenes casual corruption of business and the state colluding to create wealth for a few from the resources of the many is also the natural consequences of centralized single party rule. And even worse yet, too many citizens see that their only practical option is to withdraw from participating in their democracy rather than stand up for their rights – especially free speech and their ownership of the natural resource rights.
Have You Had Enough Yet?
We are in a political culture crisis in Alberta. Trust in our political and governance institutions is very low and legitimately so. The focus on short term political expediency over long term good governance is adding to the vicious cycle of citizen disengagement from their democracy. I am not into blaming the status-quo conservatives from the PC or the WAP that would exchange one set of ideologues with a worse set of ideologues. I am not into settling for a bigger but not better opposition as the only alternative to governing Alberta that the DRP alliance being pushed by some Liberals and New Democrats.
I think we need a revolution based on the collective revulsion we feel about the politics-as-usual way of thinking. Collective ennui about how poorly we are governed in Alberta and Canada is a luxury we can’t afford anymore. Fundamental political change is required for real democratic renewal. The DRP is well meaning but the solutions they offer are not enough to make the kind of difference we need. Messing around with the margins of low voter turnout is not the solution – peaceful but powerful revolution to restore real democracy to Alberta must be the goal.
All Political Parties are in Decline:
It seems to have been an interesting time as the Alberta Liberals and New Democratic political parties are all trying to find their way forward as viable political options. This is not that different from the Progressive Conservative party who is heading into drift and despondency - but with cash to burn. It also seems to me that all conventional political parties are fading from relevance as they become trite, tribal and tedious to most Albertans. Even the recent “phenominal growth” of Wildrose Alliance is proving to be just so much media manufactured manipulation rather than a broad-based and authentic citizen re-engagement in Alberta politics. Recent polls show that without constant media coverage providing the “oxygen” to draw attention to the WAP, they are just another listless and languishing non-viable alternative to real change from the governing PCs. The progressives remain disengaged and disillusioned about being listened to by "their" government.
The Need for Democratic Renewal
I have a great deal of respect for the leaders of the Democratic Renewal Project but have to say the model they propose for strategic voting is an erosion of choice and a dilution of democracy not a salvation for democracy. The DRP idea is essentially for Liberals and New Democrats to be “strategic” in certain constituencies where PCs have had small margins of victory. By not having Liberals and New Democrats run against each other and spit the vote the theory is more opposition members will be elected. The math the DRP has done shows that we get a bigger – but not necessarily a better – opposition. That is not good enough. We need viable alternative to the current political culture of feigned consensus if we are going to renew democracy and restore the public’s confidence in the political culture of the province.
Trying to manipulate the size of the conventional political party’s pieces of a dangerously declining rates of political participation pie is no way to strengthen democracy. We need real choices and effective viable alternatives for us to elect to form government. We need to enhance our democracy by having viable alternatives to assume office not just a bigger but not necessarily better opposition. We need to keep government honest, accountable and transparent by having alternatives not just oppositions.
Time to Design Some New Viable Governing Alternatives
The first step to this end is to stop the one-party-rule-by- default paradigm that is Alberta for so many years. In the one-party state citizens get taken for granted, or worse. The groups who do much of the work of government in the volunteer and not-for-profit sectors get intimidated, abused and bullied by the political powers. The behind the scenes casual corruption of business and the state colluding to create wealth for a few from the resources of the many is also the natural consequences of centralized single party rule. And even worse yet, too many citizens see that their only practical option is to withdraw from participating in their democracy rather than stand up for their rights – especially free speech and their ownership of the natural resource rights.
Have You Had Enough Yet?
We are in a political culture crisis in Alberta. Trust in our political and governance institutions is very low and legitimately so. The focus on short term political expediency over long term good governance is adding to the vicious cycle of citizen disengagement from their democracy. I am not into blaming the status-quo conservatives from the PC or the WAP that would exchange one set of ideologues with a worse set of ideologues. I am not into settling for a bigger but not better opposition as the only alternative to governing Alberta that the DRP alliance being pushed by some Liberals and New Democrats.
Changing Landscapes in Calgary and Alberta
I did a short video for the Calgary ATA locals on what they need to do and be aware and engaged as community leaders and citizens of Calgary and Alberta.
There is so much changing in learning these days and teachers are needed to be at the forefront of dealing with those changes. We need an expanded definition of learning, literacy and now we have no choice but to be lifelong learners.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI6ltnESuG0&feature=digest
There is another related video clip we did on Calgary's challenges and the impact on teachers and education that I will post later.
BTW the report on the Inspiring Education public dialogue initiative of Minister Dave Hancock is scheduled for release June 2.
Cambridge Strategies is a co-sponsor of two public dialogues entitled "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta" featuring Gwynne Dyer, David Peat and Scott Murray May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton. We are half sold with two weeks still to go. There is obviously lots of interest in this topic. You can get tickets at http://www.learningourway.ca/
There is so much changing in learning these days and teachers are needed to be at the forefront of dealing with those changes. We need an expanded definition of learning, literacy and now we have no choice but to be lifelong learners.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI6ltnESuG0&feature=digest
There is another related video clip we did on Calgary's challenges and the impact on teachers and education that I will post later.
BTW the report on the Inspiring Education public dialogue initiative of Minister Dave Hancock is scheduled for release June 2.
Cambridge Strategies is a co-sponsor of two public dialogues entitled "Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta" featuring Gwynne Dyer, David Peat and Scott Murray May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton. We are half sold with two weeks still to go. There is obviously lots of interest in this topic. You can get tickets at http://www.learningourway.ca/
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
The Alberta Health Superboard Should Go!
I am heading into a meeting this afternoon on Foresight this. Foresight is not about making prediction like a futurist but it is about extrapolating possibilities based on evidence, experience, insight and a bit of intuition.
That said here is my non-prediction anyway. I believe the Alberta Health Services Super Board will be gonzo sometime this summer. ..and it should be. The government has approved a five year spending envelope for healthcare in the last budget and covered off the deficits of the Superboard at the same time.
With assured healthcare funding for five years, I assume they are working a five year business plan for health care delivery in Alberta as well. With Registered Nurses in contract negotiations now and the Physicians into negotiations next year, my guess is the government will take back the duty of delivering health care in Alberta. Then who needs a Superboard?
The Klein era governance model was ostensibly built on regional advisory boards of local citizens who were presumed to be best able to know, assess and advise Ministers and government on local issues. In reality that policy proved to be more fiction than fact, especially in the execution and application. I know this firsthand from some of the work I do.
There is a full report done by the Province of Alberta on governance and conflict of interest around provincial government agencies, boards and commissions. The process was lead by Allan Tupper (formerly of the U of A and now at UBC) many years ago. The implementation of the report’s recommendations is now in the care of a senior provincial bureaucrat in Executive Council office. So far as I can see not much has been done about the recommendations. My guess this is mostly due to political inertia and a lack of political will.
The regional board system was implemented in health, childrens’ services, persons with developmental disabilities and perhaps other departments too. It has all turned out to be just another level of expensive governance without authority, expertise or an informed knowledge base to be very effective. They ended up being buffers to protect Ministers from having to deal with the rabble commonly known as citizens. Bottom line we have good people trying to do s job in a bad governance system and no political or administrative intent to change the dynamic.
These board members do not effectively connect with the local population or deal openly with local issues. My evidence and experiences suggest these regional advisory boards did not effectively connect with the government or the Ministers either. I had a conversation one such Minister who appointed well-meaning citizens these regional advisory boards. I asked if any of the appointed board members had ever given direct advice to that Minister. The answer was no. By the look on the Minister’s face in response to the question, I know a light bulb had just been turned. Perhaps that Minister had just realized why there were so many problems in the field that the Minister was chronically unaware.
It is in this context why I think the AHS Superboard will be extinct in a few months. The healthcare system started on this regionalization kick with 17 of them. That soon became 9 and one day, overnight and out of the blue, those were collapsed into one Superboard. The cynic in me says the Minister of the day wanted to fix an obvious regional leadership problem they had in the Calgary regional health board. The government did not want to look like they were picking on Calgary for political reasons, so they decided to dissolve all the regional health authorities into one. No advanced warning, no consultation, no review of the implications or consequences…and no thoughtful plan of implementation. It was just raw politics that were at work in that decision.
The former Minister of Health has since been shuffled and a new much more capable Minister is in place. A new Deputy Minister is in charge and he has the ear and confidence of the Premier. The government is back making the serious policy and implementation decisions about health care. The new leadership in the Department and Ministry of Health and Wellness has been reversing the mistakes of the former Minister and has taken almost all of the power away from the Superboard.
The Superboard and its administration were still (are still?) in the competitive slash and burn damn the torpedoes mindset of the former Minister. They failed refused or neglected to see there was a new Sheriff in town. As a result many the programs and initiatives the Superboard was implementing were stopped, stifled or reversed by the new Minister. The confusion as to roles, responsibilities and relationships between the Superboard, the Ministry and the department was enormous but it is being resolved – effectively, appropriately and dramatically from my point of view.
The political reality is the Minister and the Premier wears the good, bad and ugly politics of healthcare policy. Not the faceless members of the Superboard. The new Minister and Deputy Minister know this and, to their credit, they have taken back the control of the healthcare system into government. They are meeting people, professions and stakeholders to get a serious and in depth sense of what is going on in the field.
They are making positive changes, adding money and allowing for longer planning time frames. And they are burying the idea that private sector marketplace models based of competition will make the public healthcare system stronger and more accountable. The fact that the province has to spend $2.8 million of taxpayer dollars just to bailout a Calgary based private surgical centre from bankruptcy shows the folly of the radical right wing healthcare policy of past and possible future political regimes in the province…if the Wildrose replaces the Stelmach conservatives next election.
So while the governmet is on the job of discarding the AHS Superboard, I strongly suggest they do the same thing and dump all the regional buffer boards including in Childrens’ Services and Persons with Developmental Disabilities (PDD). They are doing more harm than good when it comes to open, transparent and accountable governance. They are not effectively governing or connecting community to government or service providers. They are political buffers for politicians – pure and simple.
Good governance is always good politics. The opposite is hardly ever true.
That said here is my non-prediction anyway. I believe the Alberta Health Services Super Board will be gonzo sometime this summer. ..and it should be. The government has approved a five year spending envelope for healthcare in the last budget and covered off the deficits of the Superboard at the same time.
With assured healthcare funding for five years, I assume they are working a five year business plan for health care delivery in Alberta as well. With Registered Nurses in contract negotiations now and the Physicians into negotiations next year, my guess is the government will take back the duty of delivering health care in Alberta. Then who needs a Superboard?
The Klein era governance model was ostensibly built on regional advisory boards of local citizens who were presumed to be best able to know, assess and advise Ministers and government on local issues. In reality that policy proved to be more fiction than fact, especially in the execution and application. I know this firsthand from some of the work I do.
There is a full report done by the Province of Alberta on governance and conflict of interest around provincial government agencies, boards and commissions. The process was lead by Allan Tupper (formerly of the U of A and now at UBC) many years ago. The implementation of the report’s recommendations is now in the care of a senior provincial bureaucrat in Executive Council office. So far as I can see not much has been done about the recommendations. My guess this is mostly due to political inertia and a lack of political will.
The regional board system was implemented in health, childrens’ services, persons with developmental disabilities and perhaps other departments too. It has all turned out to be just another level of expensive governance without authority, expertise or an informed knowledge base to be very effective. They ended up being buffers to protect Ministers from having to deal with the rabble commonly known as citizens. Bottom line we have good people trying to do s job in a bad governance system and no political or administrative intent to change the dynamic.
These board members do not effectively connect with the local population or deal openly with local issues. My evidence and experiences suggest these regional advisory boards did not effectively connect with the government or the Ministers either. I had a conversation one such Minister who appointed well-meaning citizens these regional advisory boards. I asked if any of the appointed board members had ever given direct advice to that Minister. The answer was no. By the look on the Minister’s face in response to the question, I know a light bulb had just been turned. Perhaps that Minister had just realized why there were so many problems in the field that the Minister was chronically unaware.
It is in this context why I think the AHS Superboard will be extinct in a few months. The healthcare system started on this regionalization kick with 17 of them. That soon became 9 and one day, overnight and out of the blue, those were collapsed into one Superboard. The cynic in me says the Minister of the day wanted to fix an obvious regional leadership problem they had in the Calgary regional health board. The government did not want to look like they were picking on Calgary for political reasons, so they decided to dissolve all the regional health authorities into one. No advanced warning, no consultation, no review of the implications or consequences…and no thoughtful plan of implementation. It was just raw politics that were at work in that decision.
The former Minister of Health has since been shuffled and a new much more capable Minister is in place. A new Deputy Minister is in charge and he has the ear and confidence of the Premier. The government is back making the serious policy and implementation decisions about health care. The new leadership in the Department and Ministry of Health and Wellness has been reversing the mistakes of the former Minister and has taken almost all of the power away from the Superboard.
The Superboard and its administration were still (are still?) in the competitive slash and burn damn the torpedoes mindset of the former Minister. They failed refused or neglected to see there was a new Sheriff in town. As a result many the programs and initiatives the Superboard was implementing were stopped, stifled or reversed by the new Minister. The confusion as to roles, responsibilities and relationships between the Superboard, the Ministry and the department was enormous but it is being resolved – effectively, appropriately and dramatically from my point of view.
The political reality is the Minister and the Premier wears the good, bad and ugly politics of healthcare policy. Not the faceless members of the Superboard. The new Minister and Deputy Minister know this and, to their credit, they have taken back the control of the healthcare system into government. They are meeting people, professions and stakeholders to get a serious and in depth sense of what is going on in the field.
They are making positive changes, adding money and allowing for longer planning time frames. And they are burying the idea that private sector marketplace models based of competition will make the public healthcare system stronger and more accountable. The fact that the province has to spend $2.8 million of taxpayer dollars just to bailout a Calgary based private surgical centre from bankruptcy shows the folly of the radical right wing healthcare policy of past and possible future political regimes in the province…if the Wildrose replaces the Stelmach conservatives next election.
So while the governmet is on the job of discarding the AHS Superboard, I strongly suggest they do the same thing and dump all the regional buffer boards including in Childrens’ Services and Persons with Developmental Disabilities (PDD). They are doing more harm than good when it comes to open, transparent and accountable governance. They are not effectively governing or connecting community to government or service providers. They are political buffers for politicians – pure and simple.
Good governance is always good politics. The opposite is hardly ever true.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Alberta Senators-in-Waiting Call on Stelmach to Reverse Decision & Hold New Elections This Fall.
I spoke with Link Byfield today about the three remaining Senators-in-Waiting (SIW)calling on Premier Stelmach to reverse his decision to delay the elections until 2013. The law in Alberta says the terms of these three SIWs expires in November 2010. But the loop hole in the law is that the provincial government can change things, like extending terms. But that discretion should be exercised prudently and for reasons of good government and promoting and preserving democracy...not for puerile political reasons.
THE STELMACH GOVERNMENTS REASONS FOR DELAY DON'T MAKE SENSE.
I heard the rationale for the deferral of the SIW elections to 2013. It would cost $5m to run them in conjunction with the municipal elections but no indication of how much more it would cost 3 years from now. Then there was the possibility of Saskatchewan passing similar Senator-in-Waiting legislation and it was suggested Alberta' democracy be delayed until we know if another province would also have such a law. What is that all about and why?
The third facile and farcical reason for the delay was that Alberta Senator Bert Brown had just introduced a Senate Bill S-8 "An Act Respecting the Selection of Senators. OUrugovernment has insisted that Albertans right to choose SIWs should wait to give that new law a chance to pass before we went into a new election. For you information - and thanks to SIW Link Byfield for the Bill.
Here is the summary text of Senator Brown's Bill that has caused a delay in democracy in Alberta:
This enactment establishes a framework for electing nominees for Senate
appointments from the provinces and territories. The following principles apply
to the selection process:
(a) the Prime Minister, in recommending Senate nominees to the Governor
General for a province or territory, would be required to consider names from
a list of nominees submitted by the provincial or territorial government; and
(b) the list of nominees would be determined by an election held in
accordance with provincial or territorial laws enacted to implement the
framework.
Section 3 of Bill s-8 puts a duty of the Prime Minister to recommend to the Governor General "to consider names from the most current list of Senate nominees elected for that province or territory" if a province or territory has enacted Senate selection legislation that is consistent with the principles in the Summary above. Well Alberta has has such legislation since 1985. How does Bill S-8 justify the suspension of a law that provided Albertans with a democratic right to select SIWs? Bill S-8 only puts the duty on the Prime Minister "to consider" such nominees selected by provincial or territorial law. It is not even binding for crying out loud. And this justifies a deferral and delay of democracy in Alberta?
IS DENIAL OF DEMOCRACY FOR PARTISAN PURPOSES JUSTIFIED?
OK I agree there are bigger issues and concerns facing Albertan that this theatre of the absurd Senate nominee election process. However, if our government is going to ride roughshod over these kinds of somewhat less than profound democratic rights, what is stopping them from staying the course and disregarding more significant democratic rights? This is at best causal corruption and at worst abuse of power for partisan political purposes. In no way shape of form is it good governance.
I am strongly opposed to this delay by the Stelmach government because it is unwarranted and an abuse of the discretion of the Alberta government. There is no good reason for such a delay except for pure political reasons. It seems like the PCs are running scared of the Wildrose and an election of Senators-in-Waiting this fall would likely result in Wildrose candidates winning. For the record Byfield ran as an Independent and the other three winners ran as Progressive Conservatives although they were all Reform and Alliance party faithfuls.
The result this time would see candidates running but likely mostly for theWildrose Party. This is because the Wildrose is the only party in Alberta really interested in an elected Senate for Canada. Last Senate election saw about 160,000 Albertans either refuse the Senate election ballot or spoil it as a protest. The political optics of Stelmach losing Senate elections this fall to Wildrose candidates will be seen as another referendum cum by-election result on his low popularity. He want to avoid that obviously, so the democratic deficit in Alberta deepens and widens as a result of pure political posturing - not the respect for the Rule of Law.
STELMACH RUNS IN THE FACE OF ALBERTAN'S VALUES
Integrity, honest, open, accountable and transparent government is missing with the Stelmach decision to delay the next Senator-in-Waiting election. This abuse of discretion and poor governance process to defer the next time Albertans get to say who they want be considered to represent them in the Senate until sometime in 2013 will put it after the next provincial and the next federal election too, most likely. Ironically the extension of the current crop of SIWs from 2004 to 2013 puts them in limbo longer than the eight years Harper would limit Senators terms of service.
THE STATEMENT FROM THE CURRENT SENATORS-IN-WAITING:
So here is the Statement the current crop of SIWs put out for your information. For the record I don't endorse all of what they are saying but I do applaud them for standing up for citizen's based democracy - not top down command and control centrist power based politics. That democratic deficit disease is creeping into Alberta and is rampant in the feckless Harper federal government. Looking forward to your comments.
Why we need elected senators representing us in Parliament
As Alberta’s three remaining senators-elect, we want to state publicly our belief that the Alberta government should hold a new Senate election with the province-wide municipal elections this fall. We say this solely in the interest of the province, and not for or against any provincial political party.
The government’s exercise of its legal option to extend our elected status by up to three years is not helpful to the cause of Senate reform in our view.
It is likely that one and perhaps two Alberta Senate vacancies will occur before there is a further province-wide opportunity for a Senate election.
However, in the event the government does not hold an election this fall, it would be wrong for us to leave Alberta in a position where a prime minister (be it Mr. Harper or Mr. Ignatieff) has no option but to appoint personal or party favourites to represent our province. We will therefore accept the government’s extension of our elected status until Albertans have been given a new chance to choose Senate nominees.
To illustrate why Albertans must not be represented by unelected senators, consider the recent Senate activities of Claudette Tardif.
She was picked to represent Alberta until the year 2022 by then-prime minister Paul Martin in 2005, five months after Albertans had cast 2.2 million votes to fill three vacant Senate seats. Neither Tardif nor Martin’s other two appointees ran for election.
On April 13th, 2010, Tardif introduced in the Senate Bill C-232, which if passed will require all future members of the Supreme Court of Canada to be fluently bilingual, not just in conversation but in complex and subtle points of law. The purported aim is to render translation unnecessary for judges in Canada’s highest court.
The many reasons why this private member’s bill is bad for the Supreme Court, bad for Canadian law, bad for national unity, and bad for unilingual regions, have already been aired in Parliament and in the media. Suffice it to say here that very few lawyers in Canada – and close to none in Alberta – qualify to hear a superior court legal argument in French without the aid of translation. This bill effectively kills the chance of most legally-qualified western Canadian lawyers and judges to sit on our highest court.
Neither of our two western Supreme Court incumbents, Beverley McLachlin and Marshall Rothstein, would qualify for the court under this statute.
Unfortunately, because bilingualism is so sacrosanct in Ottawa, Bill C-232 cleared the House of Commons by three votes on March 30th, with the combined support of the Bloc Quebecois, Liberals and NDP.
To add symbolic insult to material injury, C-232 was then put before the Senate by Claudette Tardif, an Alberta senator.
Instead of boosting official languages, Alberta’s six-person Senate delegation should be asking some searching questions. Is bilingualism actually working? Apparently not. According to Statistics Canada, “knowledge of [both] English and French” is a declining phenomenon, not a growing one. How much do official languages actually cost – not just for governments, how high is the immense cost of translation and compliance in the private sector? Ottawa doesn’t ask because Ottawa doesn’t want to know. Instead we blindly persist in the wishful thinking of half a century ago.
This is why we need provincially-elected senators in Parliament: to address questions the national government can’t or won’t. This is the “sober second thought” the 21st century demands.
It is time for parliamentarians to ask uncomfortable questions about productivity in the transfer-dependent regions of Canada, about our lack of success with official languages, about EI, multiculturalism, national marketing boards, and the economic value of subsidized industries.
These questions can’t be answered in the House of Commons because they can’t even be asked in the House of Commons. No national party can afford to lose the seats such candour would cost.
Nor can they be resolved in provincial legislatures, because there is nothing provinces can do about them. These are national issues under the authority of Parliament, best handled by the Senate.
In fact there is only one place where it would be politically possible to raise them and constitutionally possible to resolve them, and that is in a provincially-elected Senate such as Prime Minister Harper’s government is proposing. Not a Senate that is merely appointed, and which therefore dares not exercise the immense power it possesses under the constitution – powers equal to those of the House of Commons. And not a Senate filled with national party cheerleaders beholden to the same leaders who run the Commons.
No, to exert power the Senate must be elected, and to represent the diversity of Canada the elections must be provincial – provincial parties, federal issues.
This is what Canada needs, this is what the Prime Minister has asked provinces to provide, and this is what all Albertans should support.
Alberta Senators-Elect:
Betty Unger
Cliff Breitkreuz
Link Byfield
So dear Reader, what do you think? Is this a tempest in a teapot? Is this just the way things are and there is nothing you as a citizen can do about it? Or are you coming to realize that democracy is not free and free speech is not free either. They both have to be exercised and valued to do any good. Let you MLA and the Premier's office if you are tired of the disregard and disdain for democracy in Alberta. Whose Alberta is it any way?
THE STELMACH GOVERNMENTS REASONS FOR DELAY DON'T MAKE SENSE.
I heard the rationale for the deferral of the SIW elections to 2013. It would cost $5m to run them in conjunction with the municipal elections but no indication of how much more it would cost 3 years from now. Then there was the possibility of Saskatchewan passing similar Senator-in-Waiting legislation and it was suggested Alberta' democracy be delayed until we know if another province would also have such a law. What is that all about and why?
The third facile and farcical reason for the delay was that Alberta Senator Bert Brown had just introduced a Senate Bill S-8 "An Act Respecting the Selection of Senators. OUrugovernment has insisted that Albertans right to choose SIWs should wait to give that new law a chance to pass before we went into a new election. For you information - and thanks to SIW Link Byfield for the Bill.
Here is the summary text of Senator Brown's Bill that has caused a delay in democracy in Alberta:
This enactment establishes a framework for electing nominees for Senate
appointments from the provinces and territories. The following principles apply
to the selection process:
(a) the Prime Minister, in recommending Senate nominees to the Governor
General for a province or territory, would be required to consider names from
a list of nominees submitted by the provincial or territorial government; and
(b) the list of nominees would be determined by an election held in
accordance with provincial or territorial laws enacted to implement the
framework.
Section 3 of Bill s-8 puts a duty of the Prime Minister to recommend to the Governor General "to consider names from the most current list of Senate nominees elected for that province or territory" if a province or territory has enacted Senate selection legislation that is consistent with the principles in the Summary above. Well Alberta has has such legislation since 1985. How does Bill S-8 justify the suspension of a law that provided Albertans with a democratic right to select SIWs? Bill S-8 only puts the duty on the Prime Minister "to consider" such nominees selected by provincial or territorial law. It is not even binding for crying out loud. And this justifies a deferral and delay of democracy in Alberta?
IS DENIAL OF DEMOCRACY FOR PARTISAN PURPOSES JUSTIFIED?
OK I agree there are bigger issues and concerns facing Albertan that this theatre of the absurd Senate nominee election process. However, if our government is going to ride roughshod over these kinds of somewhat less than profound democratic rights, what is stopping them from staying the course and disregarding more significant democratic rights? This is at best causal corruption and at worst abuse of power for partisan political purposes. In no way shape of form is it good governance.
I am strongly opposed to this delay by the Stelmach government because it is unwarranted and an abuse of the discretion of the Alberta government. There is no good reason for such a delay except for pure political reasons. It seems like the PCs are running scared of the Wildrose and an election of Senators-in-Waiting this fall would likely result in Wildrose candidates winning. For the record Byfield ran as an Independent and the other three winners ran as Progressive Conservatives although they were all Reform and Alliance party faithfuls.
The result this time would see candidates running but likely mostly for theWildrose Party. This is because the Wildrose is the only party in Alberta really interested in an elected Senate for Canada. Last Senate election saw about 160,000 Albertans either refuse the Senate election ballot or spoil it as a protest. The political optics of Stelmach losing Senate elections this fall to Wildrose candidates will be seen as another referendum cum by-election result on his low popularity. He want to avoid that obviously, so the democratic deficit in Alberta deepens and widens as a result of pure political posturing - not the respect for the Rule of Law.
STELMACH RUNS IN THE FACE OF ALBERTAN'S VALUES
Integrity, honest, open, accountable and transparent government is missing with the Stelmach decision to delay the next Senator-in-Waiting election. This abuse of discretion and poor governance process to defer the next time Albertans get to say who they want be considered to represent them in the Senate until sometime in 2013 will put it after the next provincial and the next federal election too, most likely. Ironically the extension of the current crop of SIWs from 2004 to 2013 puts them in limbo longer than the eight years Harper would limit Senators terms of service.
THE STATEMENT FROM THE CURRENT SENATORS-IN-WAITING:
So here is the Statement the current crop of SIWs put out for your information. For the record I don't endorse all of what they are saying but I do applaud them for standing up for citizen's based democracy - not top down command and control centrist power based politics. That democratic deficit disease is creeping into Alberta and is rampant in the feckless Harper federal government. Looking forward to your comments.
Why we need elected senators representing us in Parliament
As Alberta’s three remaining senators-elect, we want to state publicly our belief that the Alberta government should hold a new Senate election with the province-wide municipal elections this fall. We say this solely in the interest of the province, and not for or against any provincial political party.
The government’s exercise of its legal option to extend our elected status by up to three years is not helpful to the cause of Senate reform in our view.
It is likely that one and perhaps two Alberta Senate vacancies will occur before there is a further province-wide opportunity for a Senate election.
However, in the event the government does not hold an election this fall, it would be wrong for us to leave Alberta in a position where a prime minister (be it Mr. Harper or Mr. Ignatieff) has no option but to appoint personal or party favourites to represent our province. We will therefore accept the government’s extension of our elected status until Albertans have been given a new chance to choose Senate nominees.
To illustrate why Albertans must not be represented by unelected senators, consider the recent Senate activities of Claudette Tardif.
She was picked to represent Alberta until the year 2022 by then-prime minister Paul Martin in 2005, five months after Albertans had cast 2.2 million votes to fill three vacant Senate seats. Neither Tardif nor Martin’s other two appointees ran for election.
On April 13th, 2010, Tardif introduced in the Senate Bill C-232, which if passed will require all future members of the Supreme Court of Canada to be fluently bilingual, not just in conversation but in complex and subtle points of law. The purported aim is to render translation unnecessary for judges in Canada’s highest court.
The many reasons why this private member’s bill is bad for the Supreme Court, bad for Canadian law, bad for national unity, and bad for unilingual regions, have already been aired in Parliament and in the media. Suffice it to say here that very few lawyers in Canada – and close to none in Alberta – qualify to hear a superior court legal argument in French without the aid of translation. This bill effectively kills the chance of most legally-qualified western Canadian lawyers and judges to sit on our highest court.
Neither of our two western Supreme Court incumbents, Beverley McLachlin and Marshall Rothstein, would qualify for the court under this statute.
Unfortunately, because bilingualism is so sacrosanct in Ottawa, Bill C-232 cleared the House of Commons by three votes on March 30th, with the combined support of the Bloc Quebecois, Liberals and NDP.
To add symbolic insult to material injury, C-232 was then put before the Senate by Claudette Tardif, an Alberta senator.
Instead of boosting official languages, Alberta’s six-person Senate delegation should be asking some searching questions. Is bilingualism actually working? Apparently not. According to Statistics Canada, “knowledge of [both] English and French” is a declining phenomenon, not a growing one. How much do official languages actually cost – not just for governments, how high is the immense cost of translation and compliance in the private sector? Ottawa doesn’t ask because Ottawa doesn’t want to know. Instead we blindly persist in the wishful thinking of half a century ago.
This is why we need provincially-elected senators in Parliament: to address questions the national government can’t or won’t. This is the “sober second thought” the 21st century demands.
It is time for parliamentarians to ask uncomfortable questions about productivity in the transfer-dependent regions of Canada, about our lack of success with official languages, about EI, multiculturalism, national marketing boards, and the economic value of subsidized industries.
These questions can’t be answered in the House of Commons because they can’t even be asked in the House of Commons. No national party can afford to lose the seats such candour would cost.
Nor can they be resolved in provincial legislatures, because there is nothing provinces can do about them. These are national issues under the authority of Parliament, best handled by the Senate.
In fact there is only one place where it would be politically possible to raise them and constitutionally possible to resolve them, and that is in a provincially-elected Senate such as Prime Minister Harper’s government is proposing. Not a Senate that is merely appointed, and which therefore dares not exercise the immense power it possesses under the constitution – powers equal to those of the House of Commons. And not a Senate filled with national party cheerleaders beholden to the same leaders who run the Commons.
No, to exert power the Senate must be elected, and to represent the diversity of Canada the elections must be provincial – provincial parties, federal issues.
This is what Canada needs, this is what the Prime Minister has asked provinces to provide, and this is what all Albertans should support.
Alberta Senators-Elect:
Betty Unger
Cliff Breitkreuz
Link Byfield
So dear Reader, what do you think? Is this a tempest in a teapot? Is this just the way things are and there is nothing you as a citizen can do about it? Or are you coming to realize that democracy is not free and free speech is not free either. They both have to be exercised and valued to do any good. Let you MLA and the Premier's office if you are tired of the disregard and disdain for democracy in Alberta. Whose Alberta is it any way?
Albertans Are Embracing Citizenship and Activism Again!
When I see active engaged citizenship I can't help but participate and promote it. At the bottom of thie blog post is a News Release from ARTES (Association for Responsive Trusteeship in Edmonton Schools) of an event I am speaking at in Edmonton on public education and Trusteeship on May 15th. This an example of this kind of get informed and get involved citizen activism we need to overcome the democratic deficit we have allowed to prevail in Alberta - and Canada for that matter.
LEARNING OUR WAY TO THE NEXT ALBERTA:
It is all coming together as people take back control, start creating alternative approaches and changing the outmoded top down command and control style of politics and governance. To get more of a flavour of this kind of awareness and engagement as an Albertan come to an of interesting public lecture (May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton) featuring Gywnne Dyer as we are Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta. That link will give you more information on Learning Our Way and allow your to buy tickets at $10 each. It is open to the public all about a better more vibrant and vital democracy. It is very much in the spirit of the Reboot Alberta citizen's initiative - but this is not a Reboot Event.
So if you care and are committed to the future of Alberta and keen on preserving and advancing what is good and can be better about our province, join us at these events and others that are being planned.
ARTES:
Here is the news release for the ARTES event as well. I will be speaking on the Albertans values survey we recently did within the progressive Reboot Alberta community. I look forward to meeting you at either or both events.
May 10th, 2010
For Immediate Release
Election event planned for potential trustee candidates
The (ARTES) will host a wine and cheese mixer for people interested in local education issues, including potential candidates who are eyeing the possibility of running in the fall election.
The focus will be on building connections, but the event will also include three brief presentations:
- Dale Hudjik, ARTES president, on the principles of effective and responsive governance;
- Lynn Odynski, a former EPSB trustee, on the responsibilities of the office; and
- Ken Chapman, partner at Cambridge Strategies, on the values that voters identify as most important heading into the vote.
Anyone considering standing for election as a trustee is invited to attend, along with members of the public who want to learn more the school board system or get to know potential candidates.
Event details:
Saturday, May 15th, 7-9 p.m.
Woodcroft Community League Hall
13915 - 115th Avenue
Media contact:
Dale Hudjik
c. 1.780.904.6081
dale.hudjik@gmail.com
http://www.responsivetrustee.com
ARTES (ar-tes) represents people committed to the welfare of children and public education in Edmonton. It seeks to encourage high quality candidates for school boards.
Mission: To encourage and support school trustee candidates who are independent, transparent in their views and values, accountable, forward-looking, and responsive to the community.
- 30 -
LEARNING OUR WAY TO THE NEXT ALBERTA:
It is all coming together as people take back control, start creating alternative approaches and changing the outmoded top down command and control style of politics and governance. To get more of a flavour of this kind of awareness and engagement as an Albertan come to an of interesting public lecture (May 31 in Calgary and June 1 in Edmonton) featuring Gywnne Dyer as we are Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta. That link will give you more information on Learning Our Way and allow your to buy tickets at $10 each. It is open to the public all about a better more vibrant and vital democracy. It is very much in the spirit of the Reboot Alberta citizen's initiative - but this is not a Reboot Event.
So if you care and are committed to the future of Alberta and keen on preserving and advancing what is good and can be better about our province, join us at these events and others that are being planned.
ARTES:
Here is the news release for the ARTES event as well. I will be speaking on the Albertans values survey we recently did within the progressive Reboot Alberta community. I look forward to meeting you at either or both events.
May 10th, 2010
For Immediate Release
Election event planned for potential trustee candidates
The (ARTES) will host a wine and cheese mixer for people interested in local education issues, including potential candidates who are eyeing the possibility of running in the fall election.
The focus will be on building connections, but the event will also include three brief presentations:
- Dale Hudjik, ARTES president, on the principles of effective and responsive governance;
- Lynn Odynski, a former EPSB trustee, on the responsibilities of the office; and
- Ken Chapman, partner at Cambridge Strategies, on the values that voters identify as most important heading into the vote.
Anyone considering standing for election as a trustee is invited to attend, along with members of the public who want to learn more the school board system or get to know potential candidates.
Event details:
Saturday, May 15th, 7-9 p.m.
Woodcroft Community League Hall
13915 - 115th Avenue
Media contact:
Dale Hudjik
c. 1.780.904.6081
dale.hudjik@gmail.com
http://www.responsivetrustee.com
ARTES (ar-tes) represents people committed to the welfare of children and public education in Edmonton. It seeks to encourage high quality candidates for school boards.
Mission: To encourage and support school trustee candidates who are independent, transparent in their views and values, accountable, forward-looking, and responsive to the community.
- 30 -
Sunday, May 09, 2010
Joe Anglin's Passion is to Pursue the Forces of Power in the Province.
I don't usually do "guest blogs" in this space...and this is not an exception although it may look like it. Fellow Rebooter and activist Joe Anglin has been tireless in his pursuit of fairness, justice, accountability, honesty and transparency. He has been especially diligent around issues of electricity transmission and impact on private property rights in rural Alberta.
I get Joe's missives on these complex issues and read them. But like so many other Albertan's I feel the issues are too complex and as an individual I am too powerless to do much about them. That is a dangerous and unhelpful attitude to take. If citizen's are going to take on changing the power system - in many levels of that term - then we need to know what we are talking about and what we want as an alternative.
Joe's latest message is pretty simple to follow and pretty important to understand. I am sure he would be delighted to hear from you if you wantt to learn and know more about these critical issues to the future fairness, progress, sustainability and well-being of Alberta and Albertans.
Here is what Joe sent me. Read it and reflect on it and tell him, me, and mostly your local MLA, what you think.
Is AltaLink double dipping on the public?????
AltaLink has asked the Alberta Utilities Commission to force the Alberta public to reimburse $35 million dollars for the costs AltaLink incurred during the 2007 500KV transmission line hearings.
What costs did AltaLink incur in 2007? The majority of engineering costs for the 500KV transmission line were incurred and reimbursed to AltaLink from the 2004 “Needs” hearing process. After the need for a 500KV transmission line was approved by the EUB, the EUB reimbursed AltaLink for its costs in Decision 2005-037.
In fact, in Decision 2005-037 the EUB Board wrote:
The AESO claimed $262,195.13 with respect to its participation in the proceeding. Of that amount, $96,989.00 related to legal fees, $38,072.53 related to consulting fees, and the remainder related to disbursements.
AltaLink claimed $204,500.03 with respect to its participation in the proceeding. Of that amount, $172,732.00 related to legal fees, $19,155.00 related to consulting fees, and $12,613.03 related to disbursements. AltaLink participated in the pre-hearing meeting, prepared written submissions, IRs, and answers to IRs, cross-examined the City of Calgary (Calgary) and IPCAA/ADC, and provided argument at the proceeding. The Board considers that AltaLink was one of the major participants in the proceeding.
The “Needs” hearing determined the size of the line, and where the line was going to be placed in the west corridor. The size of the line dictated the size and type of the conductor, which dictated the size and type of towers. After the “needs” hearing there was little left for AltaLink’s engineers to do! All that remained was for AltaLink’s engineers to space the towers apart, (on a piece of paper), from one another in a straight line, and count the total number of towers. It is reasonable to believe that AltaLink’s engineers should be able to count approximately 300 towers for considerably less than $35 million dollars!
Surely, Borden Ladner and Gervais (BLG), AltaLink’s lawyers, didn’t charge $35 million dollars in legal fees! After all, AESO and AltaLink’s combined legal expenses only totalled to less than $500,000 dollars for the “Needs” hearing, and the total 2007 legal costs incurred for all 32 parties involved (each represented by individual lawyers and consultants), amounted to less than $1.9 million dollars. Ralph Klein and the former EUB Chairman, Neil McCrank, who coincidently oversaw the approval of the transmission line, who both now work for BLG – could they be worth $35 million dollars?
What the public needs is a full independent judicial inquiry into this debacle!
Joe Anglin
Rimbey, Alberta
(403) 843-3279
This commenary from Joe Anglin says alot to the citizens of Alberta but are we saying enough to change things in the way we are governed in our province? Whose province is it anyway?
I get Joe's missives on these complex issues and read them. But like so many other Albertan's I feel the issues are too complex and as an individual I am too powerless to do much about them. That is a dangerous and unhelpful attitude to take. If citizen's are going to take on changing the power system - in many levels of that term - then we need to know what we are talking about and what we want as an alternative.
Joe's latest message is pretty simple to follow and pretty important to understand. I am sure he would be delighted to hear from you if you wantt to learn and know more about these critical issues to the future fairness, progress, sustainability and well-being of Alberta and Albertans.
Here is what Joe sent me. Read it and reflect on it and tell him, me, and mostly your local MLA, what you think.
Is AltaLink double dipping on the public?????
AltaLink has asked the Alberta Utilities Commission to force the Alberta public to reimburse $35 million dollars for the costs AltaLink incurred during the 2007 500KV transmission line hearings.
What costs did AltaLink incur in 2007? The majority of engineering costs for the 500KV transmission line were incurred and reimbursed to AltaLink from the 2004 “Needs” hearing process. After the need for a 500KV transmission line was approved by the EUB, the EUB reimbursed AltaLink for its costs in Decision 2005-037.
In fact, in Decision 2005-037 the EUB Board wrote:
The AESO claimed $262,195.13 with respect to its participation in the proceeding. Of that amount, $96,989.00 related to legal fees, $38,072.53 related to consulting fees, and the remainder related to disbursements.
AltaLink claimed $204,500.03 with respect to its participation in the proceeding. Of that amount, $172,732.00 related to legal fees, $19,155.00 related to consulting fees, and $12,613.03 related to disbursements. AltaLink participated in the pre-hearing meeting, prepared written submissions, IRs, and answers to IRs, cross-examined the City of Calgary (Calgary) and IPCAA/ADC, and provided argument at the proceeding. The Board considers that AltaLink was one of the major participants in the proceeding.
The “Needs” hearing determined the size of the line, and where the line was going to be placed in the west corridor. The size of the line dictated the size and type of the conductor, which dictated the size and type of towers. After the “needs” hearing there was little left for AltaLink’s engineers to do! All that remained was for AltaLink’s engineers to space the towers apart, (on a piece of paper), from one another in a straight line, and count the total number of towers. It is reasonable to believe that AltaLink’s engineers should be able to count approximately 300 towers for considerably less than $35 million dollars!
Surely, Borden Ladner and Gervais (BLG), AltaLink’s lawyers, didn’t charge $35 million dollars in legal fees! After all, AESO and AltaLink’s combined legal expenses only totalled to less than $500,000 dollars for the “Needs” hearing, and the total 2007 legal costs incurred for all 32 parties involved (each represented by individual lawyers and consultants), amounted to less than $1.9 million dollars. Ralph Klein and the former EUB Chairman, Neil McCrank, who coincidently oversaw the approval of the transmission line, who both now work for BLG – could they be worth $35 million dollars?
What the public needs is a full independent judicial inquiry into this debacle!
Joe Anglin
Rimbey, Alberta
(403) 843-3279
This commenary from Joe Anglin says alot to the citizens of Alberta but are we saying enough to change things in the way we are governed in our province? Whose province is it anyway?
Friday, May 07, 2010
Supreme Court Clarifies Confidential Sources & Whithers Our Democracy?
Supreme Court of Canada rules media confidentiality of sources is not absolute. I have not read the judgement yet but I will and will comment more on it later.
According to news sources the court recognized “for the first time that journalistic privilege against divulging sources can exist, but they concluded that each case must be weighed on its own merits.”
This means each time a media source wants to be confidential an evaluation will have to be made about is the protection of the secret source in the public interest and does the confidentiality protection outweigh other competing interests.
This has implications all over the place including bloggers. Some bloggers are becoming news sources and often the recipients of anonymous tips and evidence. I know that is my experience and I am not alone. Bloggers are becoming more like journalists and professional journalists are blogging. The conventional and social media norms, rules and laws and changing and traditional media ownership becomes more concentrated. The decentralized and chaotic new world of communications increases and decreases the control factor and authority of media of all kinds.
I see this Supreme Court test of what is in the greater public interest being even more interesting when we look at controlling our governments. I see the power of the state over citizens as significant as terrorism. The recent rise in the tendency of governments at the political and program levels to intimidate, bully, threaten and scapegoat people and organizations they disagree with is a very disturbing trend to a free and democratic society.
The role of dissent is crucial to free speech and a vibrant democracy. When citizens and organizations acting on behalf of the state, helping the state in decision support roles or advocating for change to improve our society can be marginalized by Big Brother hostile attitudes from the politically powerful, we run the risk of destroying our democracy through disengagement.
At Reboot 2.0 we heard from lots of Alberta not-for-profit organizations that were being threatened by our provincial government with funding cuts and career limitations if they spoke publicly about provincial government policy decisions. Many of those social program funding cuts were being made for selective political purposes, not good governance objectives. Fortunately these groups are banding together and finding strength in numbers and standing up to such Big Government harassment.
When a Senator can advise women’s groups to “Shut the fuck up” about the Harper government’s ridiculous stand to deny abortion funding in its maternal care (sic) foreign aid fiasco we need to worry. Senator Nancy Ruth warned that there would be government push back and repercussions if there was vocal opposition to the anti-abortion ideology of the Harper government. This politically motivated hypocritical farce has been vigorously opposed by some activist women’s groups. Many of them found their funding cut by the Harper government the very next day.
We see Prime Minister Harper Proroguing Parliament just to hide information on torture of Afghan detainees from the Canadian public as a further erosion of democracy for purposes of retaining personal political power. We see some political theatre of the absurd as Premier Stelmach presumptuously and unilaterally extends of the term of current Senators-in-Waiting rather than face the legislated election of replacements. This inept political posturing is motivated by fear of a potential electoral embarrassment in elections this fall in the face of rise of the Wildrose Alliance .
In such a climate of fear the state can stifle discussion and derail debate and, the process, destroy an effective democracy. Now if you are brave enough to leak confidential information to the media you need to be pretty sure you know what you are doing and be prepared to face the consequences. With the recent Supreme Court decision you can rest assured Big Brother government like Steve Harper’s will come after you, one way or another. We have seen how they handle their friends like Mulroney and Jaffer. Imagine how they will handle a little guy!
Citizens have to regain control of the politics and governance processes of oir democracy. I think government is an important agent for change but with the wrong people in power the change is never good. Be careful who you trust to govern us and get serious about understanding your power and options as citizens. If you want to learn more join the Reboot Alberta citizens movement and be part of the solution
According to news sources the court recognized “for the first time that journalistic privilege against divulging sources can exist, but they concluded that each case must be weighed on its own merits.”
This means each time a media source wants to be confidential an evaluation will have to be made about is the protection of the secret source in the public interest and does the confidentiality protection outweigh other competing interests.
This has implications all over the place including bloggers. Some bloggers are becoming news sources and often the recipients of anonymous tips and evidence. I know that is my experience and I am not alone. Bloggers are becoming more like journalists and professional journalists are blogging. The conventional and social media norms, rules and laws and changing and traditional media ownership becomes more concentrated. The decentralized and chaotic new world of communications increases and decreases the control factor and authority of media of all kinds.
I see this Supreme Court test of what is in the greater public interest being even more interesting when we look at controlling our governments. I see the power of the state over citizens as significant as terrorism. The recent rise in the tendency of governments at the political and program levels to intimidate, bully, threaten and scapegoat people and organizations they disagree with is a very disturbing trend to a free and democratic society.
The role of dissent is crucial to free speech and a vibrant democracy. When citizens and organizations acting on behalf of the state, helping the state in decision support roles or advocating for change to improve our society can be marginalized by Big Brother hostile attitudes from the politically powerful, we run the risk of destroying our democracy through disengagement.
At Reboot 2.0 we heard from lots of Alberta not-for-profit organizations that were being threatened by our provincial government with funding cuts and career limitations if they spoke publicly about provincial government policy decisions. Many of those social program funding cuts were being made for selective political purposes, not good governance objectives. Fortunately these groups are banding together and finding strength in numbers and standing up to such Big Government harassment.
When a Senator can advise women’s groups to “Shut the fuck up” about the Harper government’s ridiculous stand to deny abortion funding in its maternal care (sic) foreign aid fiasco we need to worry. Senator Nancy Ruth warned that there would be government push back and repercussions if there was vocal opposition to the anti-abortion ideology of the Harper government. This politically motivated hypocritical farce has been vigorously opposed by some activist women’s groups. Many of them found their funding cut by the Harper government the very next day.
We see Prime Minister Harper Proroguing Parliament just to hide information on torture of Afghan detainees from the Canadian public as a further erosion of democracy for purposes of retaining personal political power. We see some political theatre of the absurd as Premier Stelmach presumptuously and unilaterally extends of the term of current Senators-in-Waiting rather than face the legislated election of replacements. This inept political posturing is motivated by fear of a potential electoral embarrassment in elections this fall in the face of rise of the Wildrose Alliance .
In such a climate of fear the state can stifle discussion and derail debate and, the process, destroy an effective democracy. Now if you are brave enough to leak confidential information to the media you need to be pretty sure you know what you are doing and be prepared to face the consequences. With the recent Supreme Court decision you can rest assured Big Brother government like Steve Harper’s will come after you, one way or another. We have seen how they handle their friends like Mulroney and Jaffer. Imagine how they will handle a little guy!
Citizens have to regain control of the politics and governance processes of oir democracy. I think government is an important agent for change but with the wrong people in power the change is never good. Be careful who you trust to govern us and get serious about understanding your power and options as citizens. If you want to learn more join the Reboot Alberta citizens movement and be part of the solution
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta
We live in challenging, changing, and uncertain times. Fortunately, Albertans have the strengths, stability and stamina to deal with these volatile times. We have the resources needed to plan the next Alberta in ways that are adaptive, deliberative and wise.
That vision inspired a public lecture in Calgary (May 31) and in Edmonton (June 1) entitled “Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta.” We have three internationally renowned expert speakers. Gwynne Dyer author of “Climate Wars,” David Peat, author of “From Certainty to Uncertainy” and Scott Murray, a literacy expert and researcher who has studied impacts and implications of low literacy levels on Alberta’s economy and competitiveness.
These speakers are very familiar with Alberta. They will share perceptions, trends and ideas about the potential of a learning culture in our province. It will be an informative and engaging evening with a focus on how we go about “Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta” together.
Space is limited so we encourage early registration. For more information and online registration please CLICK HERE
That vision inspired a public lecture in Calgary (May 31) and in Edmonton (June 1) entitled “Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta.” We have three internationally renowned expert speakers. Gwynne Dyer author of “Climate Wars,” David Peat, author of “From Certainty to Uncertainy” and Scott Murray, a literacy expert and researcher who has studied impacts and implications of low literacy levels on Alberta’s economy and competitiveness.
These speakers are very familiar with Alberta. They will share perceptions, trends and ideas about the potential of a learning culture in our province. It will be an informative and engaging evening with a focus on how we go about “Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta” together.
Space is limited so we encourage early registration. For more information and online registration please CLICK HERE
Monday, May 03, 2010
Alberta Venture "The Right Call" About Working From Home
The May issue of Alberta Venture magazine is out and here is the link to The Right Call column on telecommuting and working from home. Not for everyone and not as easy as it seems in many cases. However when it works, it should be a viable alternative and given serious consideration.
Sunday, May 02, 2010
Alberta! Whose Province is it Anyway?
Kevin Taft’s excellent piece on the Alberta economy and what has happened to growth, taxes and public policy directions in our province is worth a careful and reflective read. It begs a couple of serious public policy questions about what kind of Alberta we have and who’s province is it anyway. I think I will be doing many more posts on those questions in the future.
In his op-ed piece “Public Spending Stayed Flat as Alberta Economy Grew” he “follows the money” with some very disturbing observations about the balance of power in Alberta. He underscores the lack of attention to the needs of the greater good giving way to the profligate pursuit of short term private profit by keeping taxes low to attract investment. We all want low taxes but not so low that we can’t provide for our children, our vulnerable citizens, our safety and security and preserve natural capital and expand our human capital.
Then add the absurdly low royalty rates we change our tenants on energy exploitation crown lands and you can see where most of the money from our non-renewable resources is going. To excessive private profits at the expense of the long term common good of Albertans now and in the future.
Like Taft, I agree that profits are important and a reasonable rate of return on investments relative to risk is vital to a successful economy and a viable society. What I see happening these days is the society is subservient to the economy instead of the economy being in service of the social goals of Albertans, including the environment. Our government is not the proxy of the public interest as much as it is pandering to the private interests of the energy sector as forestry, agriculture, manufacturing and innovation languish.
The argument is not about which is better, big business or big government. Neither is appropriate to solve the problems we face or to achieve our potential as a province and a people. We need an efficient adaptable sustainable private sector economy that creates real wealth for a society not just short term excessive profits for a few. And we need a values based empowering public governance model that enables and empowers citizens to achieve their personal potential in a safe, secure, adaptive, resilient and self-reliant way that also contributes to society.
I think there are two overarching critical uncertainties that cause a creative tension between our market-based capitalist economy and our responsible representative democratic society. One critical uncertainty is that we need to balance the constantly moving ground between the rights and responsibilities of individual self-interest and the collective interests of the common good. We are all in this world together and alone so how do we rationalize the various personal roles and relationships within our culture as contributing members of our society?
The other critical uncertainty we constantly grapple with is the creative debate as to what is best done in the private sector versus the public sector. Grappling with this question provides both its benefits and show the shortcomings of each alternative. I am a big fan of the market place, but only in its place , where business can flourish but not risk the need to serve the greater good where profit is an ineffective motivation. The market place strength of competition and the “invisible hand” is not the end all and be all of a health society, just one aspect.
That competitive principle is often a marketplace myth as we see the concentration of control and ownership, poor governance controls, short term thinking, greed is good attitudes and “too big to fail” corporations that need taxpayer bailouts because of their morally bankrupt, casual corruption and crass self-aggrandizing cultures. The marketplace is allowed to be blind to inequity, injustice, and prejudice – just to name a few blind spots in those “masters of the universe” types that are too often tolerated by governments who look to them for validation and contributions. Markets are supposed to be good at efficiency – they are not always! This is often our fault as consumers.
I am also a big fan of responsible democratic government that is principled, values based, focused on governance over politics and representative and concentrated on serving the best interests of voters – not themselves. We need more politicians who are intelligent, wise and courageous enough to know what they stand for, speak out clearly about it and champion causes that reflect their personal principles and values – especially at election time. We don’t have a very good record of providing a comprehensive sense of good government in Alberta. The future for comprehensive good government looks even bleaker with the few political and policy options we are being offered from the PCs and the Wildrose. Governments are supposed to be good at effectiveness – they are not always! This is often our fault as citizens because we disengage from our civic responsibilities.
So thank you Kevin Taft for this insight and analysis of what has actually been going on in Alberta’s public spending. It is a crime that we can’t seen our way to meeting our social and environmental obligations to each other and this place we call home compared to the wealth we are creating and concentrating in the big corporate sector in this province. It is a fair assessment of a situation that is not fair to Alberta’s best interests or the best interests of ordinary Albertans either.
We Albertans can only blame ourselves. We seem to have abdicated our civic duty to this place environmentally, socially and politically…hell 60% of us can’t be bothered to get up to speed on the issues and learn about the political options so we can cast an informed vote. And while we were sublimely indifferent and disengaged our government has defaulted in its duty to serve the greater good too. It has put corporate profits ahead of the public good in a short-term shallow thinking view of Alberta’s best interests. As a once proud member of the PC Party of Alberta I take no joy in saying that. We get the government we deserve in a democracy. Too bad our expectations of ourselves as Albertans have been so apathetic. Our indifference towards realizing our full potential means that we settle for so little from ourselves, our government representatives and our industry tenants.
Wake up Alberta. It is a new century and citizenship is important again. Our democracy is in danger due to your indifference and distain for politics. Politics suck because we allow them to suck. Take control of your democracy. Create some space for viable alternatives to flourish and start demanding the end of stupid rules, insipid policy and that partisan politics trumping public interest. Thanks again Kevin for shining some light on what has been going on in the Alberta economy beyond the rhetoric and partisan positioning.
In his op-ed piece “Public Spending Stayed Flat as Alberta Economy Grew” he “follows the money” with some very disturbing observations about the balance of power in Alberta. He underscores the lack of attention to the needs of the greater good giving way to the profligate pursuit of short term private profit by keeping taxes low to attract investment. We all want low taxes but not so low that we can’t provide for our children, our vulnerable citizens, our safety and security and preserve natural capital and expand our human capital.
Then add the absurdly low royalty rates we change our tenants on energy exploitation crown lands and you can see where most of the money from our non-renewable resources is going. To excessive private profits at the expense of the long term common good of Albertans now and in the future.
Like Taft, I agree that profits are important and a reasonable rate of return on investments relative to risk is vital to a successful economy and a viable society. What I see happening these days is the society is subservient to the economy instead of the economy being in service of the social goals of Albertans, including the environment. Our government is not the proxy of the public interest as much as it is pandering to the private interests of the energy sector as forestry, agriculture, manufacturing and innovation languish.
The argument is not about which is better, big business or big government. Neither is appropriate to solve the problems we face or to achieve our potential as a province and a people. We need an efficient adaptable sustainable private sector economy that creates real wealth for a society not just short term excessive profits for a few. And we need a values based empowering public governance model that enables and empowers citizens to achieve their personal potential in a safe, secure, adaptive, resilient and self-reliant way that also contributes to society.
I think there are two overarching critical uncertainties that cause a creative tension between our market-based capitalist economy and our responsible representative democratic society. One critical uncertainty is that we need to balance the constantly moving ground between the rights and responsibilities of individual self-interest and the collective interests of the common good. We are all in this world together and alone so how do we rationalize the various personal roles and relationships within our culture as contributing members of our society?
The other critical uncertainty we constantly grapple with is the creative debate as to what is best done in the private sector versus the public sector. Grappling with this question provides both its benefits and show the shortcomings of each alternative. I am a big fan of the market place, but only in its place , where business can flourish but not risk the need to serve the greater good where profit is an ineffective motivation. The market place strength of competition and the “invisible hand” is not the end all and be all of a health society, just one aspect.
That competitive principle is often a marketplace myth as we see the concentration of control and ownership, poor governance controls, short term thinking, greed is good attitudes and “too big to fail” corporations that need taxpayer bailouts because of their morally bankrupt, casual corruption and crass self-aggrandizing cultures. The marketplace is allowed to be blind to inequity, injustice, and prejudice – just to name a few blind spots in those “masters of the universe” types that are too often tolerated by governments who look to them for validation and contributions. Markets are supposed to be good at efficiency – they are not always! This is often our fault as consumers.
I am also a big fan of responsible democratic government that is principled, values based, focused on governance over politics and representative and concentrated on serving the best interests of voters – not themselves. We need more politicians who are intelligent, wise and courageous enough to know what they stand for, speak out clearly about it and champion causes that reflect their personal principles and values – especially at election time. We don’t have a very good record of providing a comprehensive sense of good government in Alberta. The future for comprehensive good government looks even bleaker with the few political and policy options we are being offered from the PCs and the Wildrose. Governments are supposed to be good at effectiveness – they are not always! This is often our fault as citizens because we disengage from our civic responsibilities.
So thank you Kevin Taft for this insight and analysis of what has actually been going on in Alberta’s public spending. It is a crime that we can’t seen our way to meeting our social and environmental obligations to each other and this place we call home compared to the wealth we are creating and concentrating in the big corporate sector in this province. It is a fair assessment of a situation that is not fair to Alberta’s best interests or the best interests of ordinary Albertans either.
We Albertans can only blame ourselves. We seem to have abdicated our civic duty to this place environmentally, socially and politically…hell 60% of us can’t be bothered to get up to speed on the issues and learn about the political options so we can cast an informed vote. And while we were sublimely indifferent and disengaged our government has defaulted in its duty to serve the greater good too. It has put corporate profits ahead of the public good in a short-term shallow thinking view of Alberta’s best interests. As a once proud member of the PC Party of Alberta I take no joy in saying that. We get the government we deserve in a democracy. Too bad our expectations of ourselves as Albertans have been so apathetic. Our indifference towards realizing our full potential means that we settle for so little from ourselves, our government representatives and our industry tenants.
Wake up Alberta. It is a new century and citizenship is important again. Our democracy is in danger due to your indifference and distain for politics. Politics suck because we allow them to suck. Take control of your democracy. Create some space for viable alternatives to flourish and start demanding the end of stupid rules, insipid policy and that partisan politics trumping public interest. Thanks again Kevin for shining some light on what has been going on in the Alberta economy beyond the rhetoric and partisan positioning.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Canada 2020 Symposium on Greening the Oilsands Via Science & Technology
In the face of growing oppostion and noise about the Alberta oilsands, there are some rays of hope for adult converstion about responsible and sustainable oilsands development shining through. For example, today in Ottawa there is a Canada 2020 Symposium happening on “Greening” the Oil Sands: Canadian Science and Clean Tech Leads the Way.
This event deals with issues around greening the oilsands. The context will be introduced by James Rajotte, the MP for Edmonton-Leduc and Chair of the House of Commons Finance Committee, Rich George the President and CEO of Suncor and the Honourable Sandra Pupatello, Ontario’s Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Minister Pupatello is an eastener that get it about the opportunites and challenges of responsible and sustainable oilsands development. I recently heard her speak in Edmonton at the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association Oilsands Buyer/Seller Forum on the same topic.
My business partner Satya Das and author of “Green Oil” is on a panel that is moderated by former CBC political broadcaster Don Newman. The topic is “The Big Picture – Public Opinion, Politics and Policy.” The context of the panel is the acknowledgement tht theoilsands are a cornerstone of Canada’s future economic prosperity. The fact is the oilsands are seen mostly through an economic lens in Alberta and Saskatchewan but through an environmentl lens in the rest of Canada. Single lens approaches are insufficient and a more balanced local and national perspecitve about oilsands development must be achieved.
After Satya’s opening panel the next panel’s topic will be “How can science contribute to reducing the environmental impact of oilsands development.” Here is where the R&D expertise of the University of Alberta comes into play to develop strategies to meet this need. The U of A has built a powerhouse of research capacity of internatioally recognized experts working in public-private research partnershps to tackle this challenge. This panel is moderated by Dr. Suzanne Fortier, the President of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and will contributions from Dr. David Lynch, the U of A Dean of Engineering and Dr. Murray Gray of the U of A Centre for Oilsands Innovation amongsts others.
The final panel has the advantages of the insights of my friend Bob Mitchell of Connco-Phillips and the Co-Chair of the Oilsands Leadership Initiative (OSLI). It is about “What Candian clean technologies are being deployed? Which are having the greatest impact?” Reducing the environmenal footprint of oilsands development through technologies it the core of this panel’s focus. What is working and how do we accelerate these technological innovations while reducing their implemenmtation costs is the challenge facing this panel.
This is a closed session but I am sure Satya, Bob and others will be commenting on the content and context of the symposium after today. I will do my best to bring you the sense and essense of the discussions and recommendations once I have spoken with them about the symposium.
This event deals with issues around greening the oilsands. The context will be introduced by James Rajotte, the MP for Edmonton-Leduc and Chair of the House of Commons Finance Committee, Rich George the President and CEO of Suncor and the Honourable Sandra Pupatello, Ontario’s Minister of Economic Development and Trade. Minister Pupatello is an eastener that get it about the opportunites and challenges of responsible and sustainable oilsands development. I recently heard her speak in Edmonton at the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association Oilsands Buyer/Seller Forum on the same topic.
My business partner Satya Das and author of “Green Oil” is on a panel that is moderated by former CBC political broadcaster Don Newman. The topic is “The Big Picture – Public Opinion, Politics and Policy.” The context of the panel is the acknowledgement tht theoilsands are a cornerstone of Canada’s future economic prosperity. The fact is the oilsands are seen mostly through an economic lens in Alberta and Saskatchewan but through an environmentl lens in the rest of Canada. Single lens approaches are insufficient and a more balanced local and national perspecitve about oilsands development must be achieved.
After Satya’s opening panel the next panel’s topic will be “How can science contribute to reducing the environmental impact of oilsands development.” Here is where the R&D expertise of the University of Alberta comes into play to develop strategies to meet this need. The U of A has built a powerhouse of research capacity of internatioally recognized experts working in public-private research partnershps to tackle this challenge. This panel is moderated by Dr. Suzanne Fortier, the President of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) and will contributions from Dr. David Lynch, the U of A Dean of Engineering and Dr. Murray Gray of the U of A Centre for Oilsands Innovation amongsts others.
The final panel has the advantages of the insights of my friend Bob Mitchell of Connco-Phillips and the Co-Chair of the Oilsands Leadership Initiative (OSLI). It is about “What Candian clean technologies are being deployed? Which are having the greatest impact?” Reducing the environmenal footprint of oilsands development through technologies it the core of this panel’s focus. What is working and how do we accelerate these technological innovations while reducing their implemenmtation costs is the challenge facing this panel.
This is a closed session but I am sure Satya, Bob and others will be commenting on the content and context of the symposium after today. I will do my best to bring you the sense and essense of the discussions and recommendations once I have spoken with them about the symposium.
Monday, April 26, 2010
CLPNA Does Interesting Survey on Nursing Care in Alberta
We do some work with the College of Licensed Practical Nurses of Alberta so recognize this blog post is as much about my work as my opinion.
We recently did a random-sample conjoint study of 919 Albertans for the CLPNA on what values Albertans think are most important about providing them with professional nursing care. The results were interesting and more survey results are going to be available at http://www.clpna.com/ soon.
In the meantime I encourage you to visit the CLPNA site for more information on the roles, responsibilities and relationships of LPNs within nursing, healthcare and with patients. I strongly suggest you read the blog post on the recent KEP study on the appropriateness of the knowledge and education levels of soon-to-be-graduating nurses in Alberta.
There are some interesting attributes the public sees as most important and what they want from professional nurses, be they RN, LPNs or Registered Psychiatric Nurses. The top three expecations by the public are that nurses are to be skilled, knowledgeable as well as caring and compasionate. There were 15 other attributes in the study and all were seen as important, but those are the top three concerns of Albertans when they think about what is imperative for high quality professional nursing care.
With all the changes, uncertainty and volatility happening Alberta's healthcare system the CLPNA has taken this high road approach to better understanding and focused on meeting its professional responsibility to the public. They decided to go directly to Albertans and ask what they thought was important about high quality professional nursing care.
The CLPNA then went a step further and asked those same randomly selected Albertans how satisfied they were with the performance of the nursing profession in providing the kind of care they expected. There is lots of good news and some significant indications where there is room for improvement by nurses in those satisfaction results. We say this survey applies to nursing generally here because we did not differentiate between nurses, be they LPN, RPN or RNs when we asked the survey questions.
This dual approach of measuring expectations and satisfactions gives the CLPNA a clear picture of public expectations and performance impresssions on some 15 different attributes that relate to professional nursing care. What the conjoint study did was also survey members of the Licensed Practical Nursing profession on the same values. What emerged was nothing less than amazing. The over 1460 working LPNs who did the survey were 99.9% aligned with the public's priority for values and expectations of what constitutes high quality professional nursing care in Alberta.
That degree of alignment between what LPNs see as their role and responsibility with the public and patients has to be reassuring to citizens that LPNs get it. As for LPNs, they too can find gratification in the fact that what they perceive as their jobs and responsibilities as professionals are the same as the people they serve in Alberta.
These survey results have been presented and shared with officials in Alberta Health and Wellness, including the Minister Zwozdesky, Deputy Minister Ramotar, Parliamentary Assistant Sherman and head of AHS, Dr. Duckett along with other senior officals in their offices. The survey information was appreciated and well received in all instances. Now it has to be shared with others in government, other healthcare professionals, stakeholders, health advocacy groups and the general public.
So stay tuned. There are lots more interesting information coming out on the survey results. We will deal with the implications for providing high quality health care in Alberta soon, both here on this blog and at http://www.clpna.com/ over time.
Looking forward to your comments and questions.
We recently did a random-sample conjoint study of 919 Albertans for the CLPNA on what values Albertans think are most important about providing them with professional nursing care. The results were interesting and more survey results are going to be available at http://www.clpna.com/ soon.
In the meantime I encourage you to visit the CLPNA site for more information on the roles, responsibilities and relationships of LPNs within nursing, healthcare and with patients. I strongly suggest you read the blog post on the recent KEP study on the appropriateness of the knowledge and education levels of soon-to-be-graduating nurses in Alberta.
There are some interesting attributes the public sees as most important and what they want from professional nurses, be they RN, LPNs or Registered Psychiatric Nurses. The top three expecations by the public are that nurses are to be skilled, knowledgeable as well as caring and compasionate. There were 15 other attributes in the study and all were seen as important, but those are the top three concerns of Albertans when they think about what is imperative for high quality professional nursing care.
With all the changes, uncertainty and volatility happening Alberta's healthcare system the CLPNA has taken this high road approach to better understanding and focused on meeting its professional responsibility to the public. They decided to go directly to Albertans and ask what they thought was important about high quality professional nursing care.
The CLPNA then went a step further and asked those same randomly selected Albertans how satisfied they were with the performance of the nursing profession in providing the kind of care they expected. There is lots of good news and some significant indications where there is room for improvement by nurses in those satisfaction results. We say this survey applies to nursing generally here because we did not differentiate between nurses, be they LPN, RPN or RNs when we asked the survey questions.
This dual approach of measuring expectations and satisfactions gives the CLPNA a clear picture of public expectations and performance impresssions on some 15 different attributes that relate to professional nursing care. What the conjoint study did was also survey members of the Licensed Practical Nursing profession on the same values. What emerged was nothing less than amazing. The over 1460 working LPNs who did the survey were 99.9% aligned with the public's priority for values and expectations of what constitutes high quality professional nursing care in Alberta.
That degree of alignment between what LPNs see as their role and responsibility with the public and patients has to be reassuring to citizens that LPNs get it. As for LPNs, they too can find gratification in the fact that what they perceive as their jobs and responsibilities as professionals are the same as the people they serve in Alberta.
These survey results have been presented and shared with officials in Alberta Health and Wellness, including the Minister Zwozdesky, Deputy Minister Ramotar, Parliamentary Assistant Sherman and head of AHS, Dr. Duckett along with other senior officals in their offices. The survey information was appreciated and well received in all instances. Now it has to be shared with others in government, other healthcare professionals, stakeholders, health advocacy groups and the general public.
So stay tuned. There are lots more interesting information coming out on the survey results. We will deal with the implications for providing high quality health care in Alberta soon, both here on this blog and at http://www.clpna.com/ over time.
Looking forward to your comments and questions.
Monday Morning Musings
Meet Calum Graham
As the reality of Monday morning settles in I offer you something completely different...but not in the Monty Python spirit. Calum Graham is an Alberta artist that astounded me at TEDx Banff last week. This 18 year old guitarist has a great talent and wonder touch and a warm engaging personality.
Don't watch this video now. You have to get your day organized - its Monday morning and I know you are going to be busy right now. Look at it later today, when you need some 5 minutes of solace and peace to get away from the din of the day. Then come back to this blog post and find some repose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lNxlnuFHW0
Robert Genn's Letters
I was in Banff on the weekend and stopped in at a showing of new works by Robert Genn, one of my favourite Canadian artists. The great surprise was the book of collected letters Robert has been writing every two weeks since July 1999. I scanned some content and was hooked. This guy can write as well as paint. Had a nice chat with Robert and we agreed to follow each other on line. I really recommend the book even though I have only rad a few letters so far. They are the kind of writing that makes you think, reflect and reason about a wide range of issues, ideas and events. Here is a link if you are interested in more info. http://www.painterskeys.com/ and want to subscribe to his letters.
Fil Fraser has a new book too!
My long time friend and author Fil Fraser is launching his new book "How the Blacks Created Canada." The event is at Audrey's Books 10702 Jasper Avenue in Edmonton at 7:30 pm Tuesday April 27, 2010. Fil is the lead on the monthly column we do (with others) on business ethics entitled "The Right Call" for Ruth Kelly's Alberta Venture magazine.
Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta
Cambridge Strategies Inc. is co-sponsoring a lecture series in Calgary (May 31) and Edmonton (June 1) with authors Gwynne Dyer ("Climate Wars"), David Peat ("Certainty to Uncertainty: The Story of Science and Ideas in the Twentieth Century") and Scott Murray, a senior advisor in Human Resources in Science and Technology, Stats Canada. Scott has just completed some amazing research on the literacy ;levels and essentail skills gap in various labour, industry and professional sectors in Alberta. For tickets and more information go to http://www.learningourway.ca/ or email me at ken@cambridgestrategies.com
Moving On!
OK that is the good news for Monday morning. Now into the serious stuff of being Albertan and how we can be better at it. The first example will be the next post. It will be about the Greening the Oilsands: Canadian Science and Clean Tech Leads the Way symposium my business partner Satya Das and "Green Oil" author is participating in at Ottawa on April 29th. He is on a panel entitled "The Big Picture - Public Opinion, Politics, Policy." A very interesting event focused on federal government decision makers that is being organized by our friends at BlueSky Strategy Group Inc. with Canada 2020.
As the reality of Monday morning settles in I offer you something completely different...but not in the Monty Python spirit. Calum Graham is an Alberta artist that astounded me at TEDx Banff last week. This 18 year old guitarist has a great talent and wonder touch and a warm engaging personality.
Don't watch this video now. You have to get your day organized - its Monday morning and I know you are going to be busy right now. Look at it later today, when you need some 5 minutes of solace and peace to get away from the din of the day. Then come back to this blog post and find some repose.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lNxlnuFHW0
Robert Genn's Letters
I was in Banff on the weekend and stopped in at a showing of new works by Robert Genn, one of my favourite Canadian artists. The great surprise was the book of collected letters Robert has been writing every two weeks since July 1999. I scanned some content and was hooked. This guy can write as well as paint. Had a nice chat with Robert and we agreed to follow each other on line. I really recommend the book even though I have only rad a few letters so far. They are the kind of writing that makes you think, reflect and reason about a wide range of issues, ideas and events. Here is a link if you are interested in more info. http://www.painterskeys.com/ and want to subscribe to his letters.
Fil Fraser has a new book too!
My long time friend and author Fil Fraser is launching his new book "How the Blacks Created Canada." The event is at Audrey's Books 10702 Jasper Avenue in Edmonton at 7:30 pm Tuesday April 27, 2010. Fil is the lead on the monthly column we do (with others) on business ethics entitled "The Right Call" for Ruth Kelly's Alberta Venture magazine.
Learning Our Way to the Next Alberta
Cambridge Strategies Inc. is co-sponsoring a lecture series in Calgary (May 31) and Edmonton (June 1) with authors Gwynne Dyer ("Climate Wars"), David Peat ("Certainty to Uncertainty: The Story of Science and Ideas in the Twentieth Century") and Scott Murray, a senior advisor in Human Resources in Science and Technology, Stats Canada. Scott has just completed some amazing research on the literacy ;levels and essentail skills gap in various labour, industry and professional sectors in Alberta. For tickets and more information go to http://www.learningourway.ca/ or email me at ken@cambridgestrategies.com
Moving On!
OK that is the good news for Monday morning. Now into the serious stuff of being Albertan and how we can be better at it. The first example will be the next post. It will be about the Greening the Oilsands: Canadian Science and Clean Tech Leads the Way symposium my business partner Satya Das and "Green Oil" author is participating in at Ottawa on April 29th. He is on a panel entitled "The Big Picture - Public Opinion, Politics, Policy." A very interesting event focused on federal government decision makers that is being organized by our friends at BlueSky Strategy Group Inc. with Canada 2020.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
EYJAFJALLAJOKULL
Mother Nature at her magnificent best!
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/04/more_from_eyjafjallajokull.html
http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/04/more_from_eyjafjallajokull.html
Will Integrity Be Returned to Alberta's Public Accounts Committee Tomorrow?
Will wisdom prevail tomorrow at the Public Accounts Committee and the decisoin to effectively muzzle the Chair of the committee be reversed. I expect most Albertnas have no clue that yet another erosion of accountable and transparent democracy was done to us by the governmet recently.
There are rumours that the anti-democratic decision may be proposed to reveresed at the Public Accounts Committee meeting tomorrow by the same PC MLA that put the motion forward in the first instance. Here is a link to an audio broadcast of the Public Accounts Committee meeting scheduled for 8:30 am tomorrow. You might want to tune in.
Here are some links to news items and some key blog posts that will give you some background on these events.
http://communities.canada.com/EDMONTONJOURNAL/blogs/electionnotebook/archive/2010/04/20/tories-on-muzzling-public-accounts-committee-never-mind.aspx
http://daveberta.ca/?p=2492
http://daveberta.ca/?p=2401
http://www.calgaryherald.com/columnists/Braid+Dave+Rodney+veto+power+puts+democracy+peril/2927067/story.html
The price of democracy is vigilance. Tune in on-line and hear what those who have your consent to govern you are doing.
There are rumours that the anti-democratic decision may be proposed to reveresed at the Public Accounts Committee meeting tomorrow by the same PC MLA that put the motion forward in the first instance. Here is a link to an audio broadcast of the Public Accounts Committee meeting scheduled for 8:30 am tomorrow. You might want to tune in.
Here are some links to news items and some key blog posts that will give you some background on these events.
http://communities.canada.com/EDMONTONJOURNAL/blogs/electionnotebook/archive/2010/04/20/tories-on-muzzling-public-accounts-committee-never-mind.aspx
http://daveberta.ca/?p=2492
http://daveberta.ca/?p=2401
http://www.calgaryherald.com/columnists/Braid+Dave+Rodney+veto+power+puts+democracy+peril/2927067/story.html
The price of democracy is vigilance. Tune in on-line and hear what those who have your consent to govern you are doing.
Nature is Disrupting Our Lives! Can We Change or Will Nature Have to Change?
I love the fuzzy logic of climate change deniers that the “science is not conclusive.” What they can’t get their head aroudn is that is why we call it science. New ideas, innovations, realizations, discoveries and understandings are replacing old ideas all the time, thanks to science. Inconclusiveness and change is the essence of science.
That said, my real motivation behind this blog post is to consider the way we, as a species, cope and adapt to the impluses of Nature that disrupt our lives. The Iceland volcano impacted the world, most obviously parts of Europe but the ripple effect of grounded airlines is a global story of enormous economic proportion. It has shown us, in no uncertain terms, just how much humanitiy is embedded in the planet and how much we humans are embedded in each other - and how uncertainty is the default state of nature and man.
As I have said before the future of planet Earth is fine. Nature will adapt and evolve. The real over arching question for humanity is what is our future, as a species, going to be on the planet? Are we going to be adaptable and nimble enough to survive? Or are we, self-consious, self-satisfied and self-distructing in the face of what we are doing to the planet’s ecology. One thing for sure, the planet won’t miss us and does not need us. The converse is not so true.
In the short term we are being inconvenienced by Nature’s Icelandic antics that disrupt has many lives but nobody had died from this event. We have other serious disruptions of Nature going on right now that are causing death and dispair like earthquakes, floods, tsunamis. The point about the effect of disruptions is well made by Harvard’s Rosabeth Moss Kanter. In her blog, “Surprise! Four Strategies for Coping with Disruptions” she aptly notes that “Surprises are the new normal, and they are not fun.”
She outlines manmade disruptions like “…financial crises, currency fluctuations, disruptive technologies, job restructurings, shortages of vital drugs, populists’ rebellons, possible pandemics, and terrorist threats….” Those are some of the joys of us humans being embedded in each other. She then notes we get to add on the “…devastating earthquakes and extraordinary weather events.” Man embedded in Nature!
The consequences of the unexpected, according to Kanter, are a “leadership imperative” and that is about the ability to make fast effective decisions in the face of surprises. She outlines four leadership based strategies for quick response and to minimize disruptions. They are Backup, in the form of a Plan B. Communications that must be quick and spread virally. Collaboration based on human relationships grounded in commitment to one another and resiliency that empowers people to act. Finally she points out the importance of values and principles. Clear standards and values are needed to guide people in deciding on what is the right thing to do and doing it without waiting for permission.
Good food for thought. At Reboot Alberta we have taken extra effort to look at communications, collaboration and values and prinicples in our political and governing culture in Alberta. Reboot people feel there is a leadership shortfall and a shallow aenimic public policy agenda in Alberta these days. What Albertans have not come up with yet is a viable alternaitve to the status quo. We have not yet engaged in making a Plan B and turning it into the Plan A.
In the future Reboot Alberta progressive citizen’s movement has to move beyond bitching and complaining about the democratic deficit and leadership shortcomings. We have to quit merely admiring the problems and get into an activist solution space for citizens to re-imagine the purpose of politics in a more modern democracy. We need to get serious about designing some alternatives that will replace the conventional political institutions. In short we need more than a reboot of the existing political and governance culture of Alberta. We need a system upgrade.
That said, my real motivation behind this blog post is to consider the way we, as a species, cope and adapt to the impluses of Nature that disrupt our lives. The Iceland volcano impacted the world, most obviously parts of Europe but the ripple effect of grounded airlines is a global story of enormous economic proportion. It has shown us, in no uncertain terms, just how much humanitiy is embedded in the planet and how much we humans are embedded in each other - and how uncertainty is the default state of nature and man.
As I have said before the future of planet Earth is fine. Nature will adapt and evolve. The real over arching question for humanity is what is our future, as a species, going to be on the planet? Are we going to be adaptable and nimble enough to survive? Or are we, self-consious, self-satisfied and self-distructing in the face of what we are doing to the planet’s ecology. One thing for sure, the planet won’t miss us and does not need us. The converse is not so true.
In the short term we are being inconvenienced by Nature’s Icelandic antics that disrupt has many lives but nobody had died from this event. We have other serious disruptions of Nature going on right now that are causing death and dispair like earthquakes, floods, tsunamis. The point about the effect of disruptions is well made by Harvard’s Rosabeth Moss Kanter. In her blog, “Surprise! Four Strategies for Coping with Disruptions” she aptly notes that “Surprises are the new normal, and they are not fun.”
She outlines manmade disruptions like “…financial crises, currency fluctuations, disruptive technologies, job restructurings, shortages of vital drugs, populists’ rebellons, possible pandemics, and terrorist threats….” Those are some of the joys of us humans being embedded in each other. She then notes we get to add on the “…devastating earthquakes and extraordinary weather events.” Man embedded in Nature!
The consequences of the unexpected, according to Kanter, are a “leadership imperative” and that is about the ability to make fast effective decisions in the face of surprises. She outlines four leadership based strategies for quick response and to minimize disruptions. They are Backup, in the form of a Plan B. Communications that must be quick and spread virally. Collaboration based on human relationships grounded in commitment to one another and resiliency that empowers people to act. Finally she points out the importance of values and principles. Clear standards and values are needed to guide people in deciding on what is the right thing to do and doing it without waiting for permission.
Good food for thought. At Reboot Alberta we have taken extra effort to look at communications, collaboration and values and prinicples in our political and governing culture in Alberta. Reboot people feel there is a leadership shortfall and a shallow aenimic public policy agenda in Alberta these days. What Albertans have not come up with yet is a viable alternaitve to the status quo. We have not yet engaged in making a Plan B and turning it into the Plan A.
In the future Reboot Alberta progressive citizen’s movement has to move beyond bitching and complaining about the democratic deficit and leadership shortcomings. We have to quit merely admiring the problems and get into an activist solution space for citizens to re-imagine the purpose of politics in a more modern democracy. We need to get serious about designing some alternatives that will replace the conventional political institutions. In short we need more than a reboot of the existing political and governance culture of Alberta. We need a system upgrade.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)