A Tory Here, A Tory There.

The new Cabinet appointed today by Premier Redford is both a continuation of the status quo, but also contains a few hints about what to expect. If you view this as change, you need to get out more.

The 17 member cabinet has 7 associate ministers. Salary and size of cabinet are red herrings. The real issue is whether they can function well.  Previous cabinets were plagued by turf wars, empire building, and cross-jurisdictional disputes. I remain skeptical that the new Premier can fix those problems.

Surprisingly there are only 4 women in the cabinet, including the premier. (More conservative than progressive I guess.)  Edmonton and St. Albert have 5 and Calgary has 6 ministers.  The rest are rural members north of Red Deer.  The average age of the cabinet is about 48.  You could say it is more of an urban cabinet.

I was surprised to see Thomas Lukaszuk appointed deputy premier without portfolio.  You can probably guess by this the Premier will probably be spending most of her time on bitumen related issues.  Lukaszuk's job will be to keep the back benches busy, and to keep people with good ideas away from the Premier's office.

Everyone thought Ken Hughes would be the Health Minister.  As long time Redford loyalist  he was rewarded with the Energy portfolio, which is the most important ministry in this Government.  It is by far their highest priority. Hughes will travel around a lot, sort of a bitumen Ambassador.

The Health Ministry was left as is, under the care of Fred Horne.  I fully expect the Alberta Health Care system to continue to go sideways or backwards. It won't really be a priority.

The merger of Finance and the Treasury Board under Doug Horner is interesting.  Traditionally these two roles are separate because they look at spending from two different perspectives.  The merger of these two ministries suggests the Premier wants to start blasting out money without too much friction or dissent.

Jeff Johnson as Education Minister is an unknowable unknown.  Straightaway he will have to deal with the implementation of Bill 4, the relaunching of the failed new education act, and some public protests over prayer in public schools. And also those irritated religious mommy home school bloggers. Good luck with all that. Johnson and Hughes will likely work well together to get industry developed curriculum about the oilsands into the school system.  Or, as the Premier likes to call it, "facts and science".

Doug Griffiths in Municipal Affairs will have the primary challenge of trying to win back municipalities in southern Alberta who turned Wildrose.  What will the strategy be?  Ignore their needs?  Blast cash at them? I think we know by now that intimidation won't work.

What about Heather Klimchuk as Culture Minister you ask?  I don't really know much about her, or even what Alberta Culture does.  I did find a blog post from her that was written entirely in upper case. Something tells me Culture won't be all that important in this government.

This brings us to the new Transportation Minister Ric McIver.  When he was a Calgary City Councillor he postured as a fiscal conservative, got his boots licked repeatedly by Rick Bell, and on one occasion told Mayor Bronconnier that he should be nicer to Ed Stelmach.  Ric's biggest problem will be learning the new culture. In Calgary he was nick-named "Dr. No" for voting against almost every kind of spending.  As an Alberta Tory under Redford he'll certainly have to become known as "Dr. Yes, God Yes",  as they start blasting out money in all different directions. There is the outstanding issue of the South West Calgary Ring Road project, which will involve a new three way agreement between the City of Calgary, The Tsuu T'ina Nation, and the Provincial Government.  There is the more emotional and contentious upgrades to Highway 63.

Good luck to the Opposition Parties.  There is a lot to be skeptical about here.  Redford isn't a game changer or a reformer.  This is status quo politics with the usual emphasis on Party first.



Please recommend this post

Peter Lougheed Wins Again

A 1975 editorial cartoon showing the early foundations
of the  Alberta PC Party's formula for success

Former Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed has been named the best "Provincial Premier" of the last 40 years.  The poll was conducted by Policy Magazine using a small number of experts and academics.  I was curious as to their methodology, since most of the time Premiers deal with localized issues.  How do you compare premiers and rate them?

Lougheed dealt with two national issues of importance; the Constitution Act of 1982, and the National Energy Program.  Both gave him a national profile.

I don't find it hard to believe that a group of historians would pick Lougheed the winner in such an analysis, however I'm always skeptical about political mythology and idolization which by it's very nature has to completely ignore alternate viewpoints and inconvenient truths.  Lougheeds legacy is not unlike Pierre Trudeau's. It's complicated. It can be polarizing.

And then there's the timing and circumstance of the award:

The exercise was part of the institute's 40th anniversary. Also part of the celebration is a tribute dinner for Peter Lougheed on June 6 in Calgary. The keynote speaker will be Alberta's newly-elected premier, Alison Redford.

What an amazing series of coincidences.  This would be a rather awkward night if they had picked Robert Bourassa.


Please recommend this post

Morton, Hinman and Some Bickering

The last pre-election message on Ted Morton's website:

To our Supporters:

Thank you for supporting me and the PC Party—a party that has madeAlbertathe best place to work, to live and to raise a family. As your MLA for Chestermere-Rocky View, I will work for you to keep it that way.

I wasn't really sure if that was a premature victory speech or an awkwardly worded appeal to get out the vote. A paragraph down, to the undecided voters he wrote:

Vote for a candidate who has known and worked with Prime Minister Stephen Harper for over 20 years, and will work effectively with Ottawa to ensure Alberta’s continued prosperity by getting the export pipelines like Keystone XL and Northern Gateway built.

Vote for a party that will build the new schools and health facilities our growing communities need, not fritter it away with “Danielle Dollars”.

Vote for a candidate and a party that will protect the Bow andElbowRivers, and the Eastern Slopes, not a party that will repeal the Land Stewardship Act.

In summary: I'm pals with Harper, infrastructure spending, and we did nothing wrong with the land use framework. There are all kinds of interesting issues regarding Morton's election loss, however I will simply say that as the key architect of the land use framework it isn't too surprising that the voters walked away from him. The framework was perceived as heavy handed, lacking due process, and just alienated land owners. To get rural Albertans to vote out a PC Cabinet minister takes some special talent.

The sad thing is something like the framework is needed, and the alternate policy that would have been implemented by the Wildrose would have made it impossible to stop polluters, help endangered species, or act in any way in the public good.

Aside from that rumours persisted in the campaign that Morton was disinterested in the campaign. The Premier must have been extremely disappointed that he wasn't reelected. No seriously...

A gratuitous photo of Richard Nixon leaving the Whitehouse for the last time in 1974

Paul Hinman's Wildrose website, on the other hand, went 404 almost immediately after the election.  Today he announced through a local Pravda outlet that he would not be paying back wages recieved for being a member of a committee that never met. Also known as the money for nothing scandal. I'm still a little confused exactly about this pay structure, but so is everyone else. But if all of those involved agreed to pay back those wages, it seems to me that Hinman should as well. I'm not sure it's a great career move.  Rick Bell will have to find another hero.

Naturally, the party leader shrugs her shoulders. What can you do? He's a private citizen now, she roughly said. He's presumably still a party member and was or is on the executive. I only bring this up because the leader spent so much time talking about entitlements, big government, and transparency. I should learn not to be so naive.

Hinman's loss will make it interesting for the Wildrose Caucus having 17 members but only 2 with previous MLA experience, and a leader who has spent her whole career in elitist right wing bubbles. Hinman had some MLA experience that might have been useful. How to table a pseudo-scientific paper on the climate change hoax, for example. Without Hinman who else will  compare mundane legislation to Stalin and the Ukrainian Holodomor.  Someone will have to step into those shoes.

At last we get to Gary Bickman. the new Wildrose MLA for Cardston-Taber, who believes the urban voters got it all wrong and don't understand. It's a dish better served in his own words:

"I think they possess more common sense, a least that's my experience. The people who make their living off the land really seem to understand the way nature really works," said Bickman.

He went on to say that city dwellers just don't understand the issues.

"I think that these social issues that came up during the last week and the PCs ability to exploit them, caused some concern in the voters within urban areas, at least, because they didn't really understand the issues, they didn't really understand that there was an aspect of free speech, " said the Cardston-Taber-Warner MLA-Elect.

Yeah, common sense. The people who live off the land in southern alberta have it tough enough considering how arid it is. I wonder how they think nature will really work when the global climate is a few degrees warmer.

And as far as issues go, Bickman should know that almost the entire Wildrose Platform comes from institutions in the cities:  universities, the churches, and the think tanks. Even homophobia, carefully packaged  for hipsters to seem harmless comes from the large urban mega churches and the urban hate groups like Focus on the Family.  Also, professional sports.

We hope that the Wildrose MLAs keeping expressing their thoughts in the media. The party has made a rather open commitment to free speech and MLA autonomy. It should be interesting when dogma meets reality. Please recommend this post

Identity Politics and Some Numbers

The No True Scotsman fallacy often appears in arguments about philosophy or religion.  It has some bearing on the change that is about to engulf Alberta.  The fallacy would sound something like this in a conversation about Alberta politics:

You:     No conservative would vote for the Progressive Conservative Party
Me:      Well...last election 58% of Albertans voted PC, and I think they would call themselves conservative
You:    Ah...well no true conservative would vote PC.

It seems that Alberta is on a collision course with a severe case of right wing identity politics. The biggest scandals of the Wildrose campaign, a  homophobic rant, and a weird statement about caucasian power, are clear examples of the right wing's obsession with identity and conformance. However, I'm pretty sure most Albertan's who got on the Danielle Smith bus think it's really about abstract notions of populism or change. Or even just the opportunity presented by an incompetent PC campaign, an organization seemingly in it's last days. Thus, the main question of the 2012 election seems to be, who are the real conservatives? This question wrapped in the grade school rhetoric of a family feud has overshadowed other topics.

But before we can unravel this question of who the real conservatives are, we have to consider the polling numbers.  Historically, conservative parties in Alberta get between 50% to 60% of the popular vote. In 2008 it was 58%, in 2004 57% and in 2001 61%. That range holds fairly true federally as well for Albertan voters.

In the 2012 election polling suggests that the combined conservative vote will be around 70%. The one I last saw reported 41% for Wildrose and 32% for PC, a total of 73%.  So it appears that this election has magically created an addition 10-15% more conservative voters.

It's obvious that a big chunk of Wildrose voters are coming over from the PC Party, but not enough to explain the 73% estimate.  The drop in PC support is probably more precipitous than we know and may be masked by Alberta Liberal party voters moving to the PC party out of fear and loathing.  What is actually left of the PC party will be an interesting question to look into next week.

That  leaves the original question of who are the real conservatives who will take power tomorrow? Well, the Wildrose Party will cruise to victory on a well crafted narrative that they are Alberta's true conservatives. They and their friends in the media, managed to demonize Alison Redford as a "liberal" and I saw the word socialist thrown around for good measure. So the Liberal Party and the Alberta NDP never really got into the game because Redford and the PC Party became the surrogate for everything true Alberta conservatives are supposed to hate.  They appear to have tapped into some powerful voodoo about what a true Albertan is.

I suspect that the 73% conservative vote estimate will snap back to the historical range when the votes are counted.  But that won't be enough to stop the Wildrose identity movement of true and pure conservatism from being elected.  And you know that that identity will be projected onto the national stage as what every damn Albertan bar none believes.   Gird your loins.

I can just hear it now....no true Albertan would tolerate a human rights commission...










Please recommend this post

ABVOTE: Play the Obama Card.

Donna Kennedy-Glans, election flyer 2012

This was in my mailbox on Friday. Donna Kennedy-Glans is running as the PC candidate in my riding of Calgary Varsity. It's quite impressive, the production values are great.  It looks like it cost a lot. Not surprising from a governing party that spares no penny on self-promotion.  Interesting, no mention of the PC Party until the very bottom of the back page. A bit bombastic perhaps.

Kennedy-Glans and Alison Redford have one thing in common: they both tried to unseat Rob Anders as the Conservative Party candidate in Calgary West.  I wrote about it here and here. For their efforts they both had to endure the misogyny of the right wing smear machine, being referred to as "left wing feminist lawyers" and that kind of thing.  Creeps like Ezra Levant and the like had their fun with it. Stephen Harper, apparently, made it kind of clear that neither woman was his kind of people.

I was wondering about this flyer though, and the obvious homage to Barack Obama. It seems sort of opportunistic from a conservative activist. I wonder if you can ride that train while at the same time betting your economic and environmental platform on the unseating of Obama and his congressional colleagues. It seems a little strange.

There was an interesting photo op a week or two ago of Kennedy-Glans explaining to Redford that the people in Calgary Varsity were really quite angry about the committee pay scandal.  Redford, who I think has been losing the battle on body language, looked like she was ready to punch someone.

I don't have a good feel for who can win in Calgary Varsity.  I tend to think Kennedy-Glans is running third, behind the Liberal and Wildrose candidates.  She could win.



Please recommend this post

ABVOTE: Hell No

Warren Kinsella says here and here that Progressives should vote for Alison Redford's Progressive Conservative Party in Alberta's Provincial election. It is a formulaic and emotional appeal to strategic voting. It presents no argument that such a vote would accomplish anything useful.  The strategic voting argument is always stated as an urgent imperative, and is insulting to our intelligence. (So is this video, by the way.)

I will grant you at the outset, that a Wildrose government is the worst of all possible outcomes for Alberta. It's not an Alberta trait (in majority) to be ignorant racist anti-science homophobes. Few Alberta leaders (except perhaps Ralph Klein) have been so tolerant, even welcoming, of these malignant views as Danielle Smith. And yet, you can find those same views in the Progressive Conservative party any day of the week. They just manage their message better, that's all. I would rather face these people out in the open, rather than have the PC party's rodeo clowns wave their arms in my face and tell me they don't exist. I thought it would be obvious to Alberta's Progressives that voting for Alison Redford's Party will not solve any particular problem, and will probably make things worse.

So, I won't be voting for Alberta's Progressive Conservative Party under any circumstances. I never voted for them in any election from when I first started voting in the early 80's, and I likely never will.  Voting for the PC's to stop the Wildrose is a waste of time and energy.

Some reasons.

Fear and Loathing

Trying to provoke fear reactions does not work in politics when you are behind. Tim Powers is right about the Chicken Little argument, but he is wrong about the fear being unjustified.  Scaring people didn't work with Stephen Harper. We Progressives in the west knew what this train wreck would look like back in 1993. But moderate conservatives (in Ontario mostly) and the corporate media knew better, and said Harper was harmless. Now they act surprised and concerned. The same kind of media failure and cognitive distortion put Danielle Smith where she is now. Her superficial charm seems to appeal to some. Additionally, almost all of the fear tactics are being forwarded by PC supporters, with a bit of help from friends with typewriters.

A Credible Opposition

Regardless of who actually wins the election an effective, ethical and progressive opposition is more important that it has ever been. You must realize that next week we could have a legislature consisting entirely of conservatives.  In 1982 Grant Notley and Ray Martin were the sole opposition members to Peter Lougheed. Power should never go unchecked.  The PC party will be in no position to function as official opposition, even though they will likely win that status on numbers. Alison Redford will probably resign Monday night.  Last time they picked a leader it took almost a year, in what could be best described as a farcical infomercial that was fraudulently passed off as a general election of sorts.  The PC party will likely break down in infighting.  I think they are far too arrogant and used to playing god to be an effective opposition. They have no idea what the opposition does.   With the PC and Wildrose the only parties in the Legislature you can bet that most of their time will be taken up with their family feud. Aside from that being boring as hell, we have a lot of important issues to deal with.  Do you believe that 40% or 50% of Albertans who are not conservatives deserve no representation?

Voting into Decline

One good reason not to vote for the PC Party is that they are in steep decline.  We know the mythology about 1935 and 1971.  In both of those election years long running ruling parties were dumped. The 2012 election may or not follow this pattern entirely; however history would suggest that if Albertans say they are done with the PC party then they are really done with them. This may be wishful thinking on my part, but I think it is quite possible they could go the way of the Social Credit Party.  Either way, if you are a progressive in Alberta it would make more sense to take a longer view and vote into the future.  The project of fixing Alberta's political culture will take longer than any of us thought.  It's also worth considering that moderate conservative parties (red toryism) are in decline in many places. Conservative organizations seem to be more radical these days, more tea party like.

Homophobia

The PC party doesn't have an especially good record on the issue of gay rights. Stockwell Day, formerly Alberta's Treasurer and Social Services Minister had an appalling habit of saying stupid hateful things about gays.   They did remove the right of gay people to be foster parents, and that prohibition has been upheld ever since.  Between 1991 and 1998 Delwin Vriend's  human rights case against the Klein Government and the exclusion of gay people from basic human rights protection worked it's way through the courts. The Alberta government fought Vriend through to the Supreme Court of Canada, where they lost. Apparently it was quite expensive.  The result was the Supreme Court writing sexual orientation into Alberta's Human rights code, by force if you will.  The Alberta government has never apologized, nor have they ever acknowledged gay rights as human rights in any way.  I think it remains controversial for them.  And then there was Bill 44 which came out of nowhere. Some would say it was an attempt to stop discussion of gay issues in schools. That may be true. The Stelmach Government just wouldn't be honest about the purpose of the bill. 

I know the Wildrose will be worse for gay rights, with their jocular hate speech and the threats of referendums.  But at least we know that in Canada the courts will side with gay rights.  I'm not afraid to admit that I fear the worst.

Environment

Under future PC governments the output of carbon dioxide from industry will likely double or triple, with little or no mitigation. The Wildrose officially does not believe in climate change.  They had to articulate that position clearly to attract support from industry and their collection of little weenies who bravely brag online about wanting to assassinate David Suzuki.  Neither party will be effective on environmental issues. Not much of a choice on a fairly important issue.

Close Races and My Riding

Some pundits are saying that almost half of the ridings have a less than 10% lead for the front running. This, and the apparently large number of undecided voters will make the election interesting, among other things.  But in my riding the Alberta Liberal candidate has a pretty good chance of winning. To me that represents a better choice than voting PC.  And no, I'm not endorsing the Alberta Liberals, but I'm also not especially turned off by them. 

Conscience

Officially I'm still an undecided voter. But I plan on voting as in other elections, in agreement with my basic values. I know that this time next week we will be facing a whole new set of problems.  A lot of us won't be happy. Democracy and good will will be on the run.

Please recommend this post

Alberta Legislature: Scumbags, Holodomor and Property Rights

There was a debate in the Legislature today (29 Nov 2011) regarding landowner property rights. There is no doubt that at least 4 of the bills passed in the Stelmach era went too far by removing basic landowner rights, eliminating public consultation and removing the appeal process.

Wildrose MLA Paul Hinman was talking in circles about the evils of these bills, when he veered off into an analogy to European history and the Ukrainian genocide of 1932, also known as the Holodomor.

Here's what he said as recorded in Hansard:

I mean, when you look at Europe, it's interesting. They still have vivid memories of the starvation. We just had a ceremony on Monday in commemoration of Holodomor, the starvation in Europe. That wasn't because of bad weather or not being able to produce. That was, again, an evil, corrupt government confiscating property from the people and trying to take that to destroy a region which the government was having difficulty controlling. [interjection] It's interesting that the Education minister wants to ask if that's for real when many of the acts that were taken inEurope during World War II and other times very much were brutal acts that didn't respect property rights. There are many areas in these bills that have no respect for property rights. When you step down that trail, we can see the end results, and we don't want to go there, not even one step, here in Alberta. Yet many government members seem to pride themselves on this and say: “We know best. We'll put it in cabinet. Cabinet will make those decisions.” It's just wrong, Mr. Chair. That's the last place we want those decisions to be made. What happens when cabinet makes those decisions is that they become political decisions, and political decisions are rarely in the interest of the people. They're usually more in the interest of a party in retaining and holding that power.

A bit of an offensive comparison I think, and by the way, it's the same inflammatory rhetoric that many far right people use to talk about gun registries, wheat boards and the state broadcaster.  Liberals are really just Communists, after all, and they're coming for you. 

Thomas Lukaszuk, the education minister, rose on a point of order (inflammatory language) and had this response:

Mr. Chairman, before we get to the amendment, I would like to rise on a point of order under section 23(h) of our standing orders, using language that entices, I believe it is, a disorder in the House. The hon. Member for Calgary-Glenmore about three or four minutes ago in his comments made a statement that I was hoping
initially I was mishearing. Then he repeated it several times, so without a possibility of denial he said exactly what I think I heard. I know what he said. Mr. Chairman, he compared the Alberta government's land-use policies legislation to the atrocities and genocide of Holodomor in Ukraine. What he's doing is comparing
polices that we're passing in this Legislature right now to Stalin's genocide during the 1930s in Ukraine, known as Holodomor, which killed somewhere between 6 million and 10 million people. If this isn't reaching a new bottom for the Wildrose, I don't know what is.

Neither do I. It's a complete low point.  Unethical and unparliamentary.   My guess is that Hinman knew the Ukrainian reference would get under the skin. It was a targeted reference. The Wildrose view of property rights excludes any type of public or government interest in infrastructure planning. In their world, there would be no environmental laws, and probably not much public infrastructure.

The question is the restoration of the balance between private and public rights.  The government went too far in removing rights and remedies from landowners. If you've read my blog, you'll know I support almost nothing this government has done, and I don't really expect the new Premier will do much about this issue. She is just as obligated to industry groups as her predecessors.

Full hansard of the debate is here. If you're on Twitter, the debate was raging there this evening.  Check the #ableg hashtag.









Please recommend this post