Alberta: Get Rich or Die Trying

Stelmach: The fact that Albertan soliders have died in Afghanistan should absolve us from our Kyoto commitments

Daveberta has a great post today describing how Ed Stelmach - responding to questions raised about the UN's investigation into Canada's unwillingness to comply with its Kyoto obligations - argued that Alberta should be absolved from its responsibility to help Canada meet its climate targets under the United Nations' Kyoto Protocol because Albertan soldiers are dying in Afghanistan. Seriously.

From the Canadian Press article,

Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach is bristling over the United Nations threat of sanctions against Canada for failing to meet a Kyoto Protocol deadline on greenhouse-gas reporting.

Stelmach says Canada is doing its part for United Nations-backed military efforts in Afghanistan and the timing of these threatened sanctions appears to be insensitive.

"Does it bother me a bit? Yes it does," Stelmach said Thursday. "We´re in Afghanistan and just lost another soldier."

Wow. Between this and the "wind turbines kill 30 000 ducks a year" bit, it seems like the main focus of Stelmach's mandate is to embarrass Albertans on an international scale. He appears to be unaware that the mission in Afghanistan is actually a NATO-led and Canada -- not Alberta -- signed on to it, and even if that were the case his logic would still make little sense. If anyone ever thought that the Alberta government's arguments around climate change were based on sound scientific policies or rational thought, this and the Mark Jaccard report the Alberta government finally released today should have completely dispelled that notion.

I think this raises another interesting point, too: if Alberta wants to have its own embarrassingly ineffective climate change plan, it should have to go and defend it on the international stage like every other jurisdiction. At this point, Canadian provinces operate more like independent nations than European countries in this respect anyway. Could you image Canadian provinces getting along enough to burden share like the EU did?

So why don't we send Stelmach and his compelling arguments to Poland in Decemeber for the next meeting of the signatories to Kyoto? Hell, he can even take along Knuckles to back him up.

Alberta government bans CBC....well sort of

On Thursday, the Alberta government banned CBC from media lockups 'for at least a year'. This means that CBC reporters in Alberta will no longer have access to government documents prior to their public release. News organizations  are given early access in exchange for their promise not release any information until the Public Affairs Bureau (the PCs' information clearinghouse/spin machine) says its OK. Unfortunately, during the recent release of the provincial budget a CBC reporter breached this contract by sharing some  information with a Calgary official, in an effort to get a head start getting budget reactions (prior to the budget announcement). To be clear here, the information was never broadcasted on air or in anyway released to the public at large. While this was an error on the part of the reporter I doubt this isn't the first time a situation like this has occurred.

What strikes me as interesting about this whole ordeal is the harsh and swift reaction of the government. In the past few months (especially) I have noticed that CBC Edmonton's editorial line has become more and more critical of the Alberta government. In particular, reporters Kim Trynacity and John Archer were highly critical of the PCs during their last campaign and seem to have continued this trend.* I appreciate their perspectives and I certainly don't blame them for taking a position (does anyone still cling to the illusion of media neutrality?). In contrasr, the Edmonton Sun is usually painfully conservative and pro-AB government (and as such, I don't read their tabloid....I mean 'newspaper').** But, I wonder if they would have received the same punishment had one of their staffers made a minor breach?

Check out the CBC staff blog, for more deets/commentary.

*take a close look at the two photos in this last article.
**No self-respecting newspaper should frequently feature half-naked women or men on their pages.

UPDATE: Graham Thomson's Saturday column in the Edmonton Journal discusses Stelmach's penchant for vindictiveness and his 'don't mess with the Alberta government' attitude.

Liberals + NDP + Greens = you still lost the election

I took this picture while stopped for a pee break on the way back from a recent trip to Lethbridge. It doesn't really have much to with this article, but it's, I think, a very stereotypically Albertan image, so it might be an appropriate accompaniment for the discussion of heady matters like those below. Most of all I just thought it was nice and wanted to put it up...

Everyone knew that this was bound to happen sooner or later: the parties defeated in the recent provincial election are "mulling radical options," according to the Edmonton Journal. Although we're a little late (each of Ken Chapman, Daveberta, and Calgary Grit have already offered opinions on this matter), in the day-late-dollar-short spirit of the opposition parties of Alberta, I thought I would contribute a substandard analysis after everyone has stopped caring.

First of all, I'm thrilled and overjoyed to see that these parties are finally doing what many opponents of the Alberta PCs have been wishing they'd do for years -- that is, recognize that what they're doing isn't working, and take an honest look at what can be done to change this. What they've come up with thus far isn't entirely impressive, but there is some definite potential and it's great to see people actually thinking about this.

The "radical options" that the Journal article refers to are:

1. An alliance of sorts where the Greens, NDP, and Liberals don't run candidates against one another in some or all of the province's ridings, and agree to a list of "core priorities to act upon if they are able to form a government after the next election." (h/t Daveberta).
2. Liberal MLA David Swann's investigation (which apparently includes a planned meeting with Preston Manning) into starting "a new party based on green politics, accountability and democratic reform."

As Calgary Grit very capably points out in his post on the subject, the first idea is destined for failure. The last election was not lost on vote-splitting. It was lost because none of the opposition parties came close to offering up a vision that would attract support from significant numbers of Tory voters and/or non-voters. My feeling is that to ever have a hope of unseating the Alberta PCs, the farthest to the left any opposition party could be is "centre, " and in Alberta I would say that the NDP, Liberal, and Green brands all carry connotations of "left." Although these perceptions, at least in the case of the Liberals and Greens, aren't entirely based on reality, they would nonetheless result in this alliance being perceived as resolutely "left-wing" -- which might actually result in them losing total votes. In this case, I think the whole would be less the sum of its parts, which is why I'm much warmer to idea number 2.

I think David Swann is one of the best of MLAs in the legislature, so to see this coming from him is great (and not entirely surprising.) However, although the Journal story is a little thin on details, it seems that the party that he is contemplating could best be summarized as Green Party 2. If I were to start an opposition party I'd want to focus on exactly the same three things that Swann mentions: green politics, accountability and democratic reform. However, if I wanted to get elected, I'd be sure to make smart spending and continued prosperity central planks of this party's platform.

The key, I think, is to not be perceived as an environmental party that embraces fiscal conservatism -- that's what the Green Party does, and it earned them 4.6% of the popular vote last election. The key is being seen as a fiscally conservative party that embraces environmentalism (and democratic reform and accountability). Hopefully Preston Manning mentions something along these lines when him and Swann are talking.

The Alberta PC party is perhaps the biggest tent in Canadian politics. Any opposition party that wants to form government in our province is going to have to lop off a pretty big chunk of it, and I think the the time is right for a movement like the one Swann is proposing to do just that, so long as it is grounded in the fiscal conservatism that I think is basically a prerequisite for forming government in Alberta. Such a party might not attract the support of very many NDP voters, but I would say the centre to centre-right spectrum is a lot more vote-rich than the left to far-left.

That may sound a little greasy, but perpetually being in the opposition -- or, more accurately, never having a snowball's chance in hell of forming government -- sucks. I'm willing accept a little bit of spend-thriftness if it means having a Premier who doesn't wholeheartedly believe that the environmental toll of the oilsands is a "myth."

What Capitol Hill Senators and Congresspeople woke up to yesterday morning

Read about it here and here.

Photo post: Greenpeace rains on Stelmach's parade

Read about it here and here. The best part: Stelmach was in the middle of an anti-Greenpeace speech. Even if you don't agree with non-violent direct action, you have to admit that this is a pretty impressive feat. Kudos.

Photo via Facebook

Update: In case you didn't have a $450 ticket to the show. Greenpeace has uploaded some video on Youtube for your viewing pleasure.

Suncor 1st quarter profit rises from a gazillion dollars to several gazillion dollars

Read all about it here.

Good thing we didn't implement the Oil Sands Severance Tax recommended by the Royalty Review Panel. And good thing we haven't imposed any socialist, draconian carbon-reduction regulations on them. Suncor, in this environment of spiraling costs and labour shortages, is clearly walking the razor's edge between profitability and loss.

Thank goodness we have Alberta PCs to shepherd them through this difficult time.

Budget 2008: Albertans apparently fans of talking the talk

Today, as millions of Albertans went about their daily lives not caring, Finance Minister Iris Evans delivered the new government's first budget. The big story (quite literally if you read the Globe) is that Alberta's spending spree continues.

I, for one, can't say that I'm very surprised. The two main drivers of this increase, (according to Bloomberg, the government backgrounder, and a little Excel magic from yours truly) were Health and Wellness, which accounted for about 35% of the increase, and spending on new infrastructure, which accounted for about 50% of the increase (this includes spending for health-related infrastructure; I couldn't find infrastructure breakdowns by ministry).   

Healthcare spending is projected to rise by 9.1%. Last year, the combination of inflation and population growth totaled 8%. Although that likely won't be as high this year, when you factor in the demographic shifts that Alberta and much of the western world are seeing (aging and fattening population), 9.1% isn't entirely out of line (although it will no doubt be bandied about for yet another year by private healthcare advocates as evidence that healthcare costs are "spiraling out of control"). So, like I said, no surprises here.

The other big driver, infrastructure, isn't a real shock either when one considers the myopic and single-minded debt reduction of the Klein years. According to this article in the Herald, Calgary Economic Development chief economist Adam Legge agrees with me. Although we differ greatly in our degree of sanguinity, appreciation of the wisdom of the "paying off the mortgage," and general contempt for the government, we share more-or-less the same view:

"I don't really get too concerned about spending growth, because we took so long paying off the mortgage we weren't worried enough about the roof and the foundation," said Legge. "I'm of the opinion that we have a lot of catch-up to do."

Some may recall some jerks spoiling the debt-free party a few years ago by pointing out that despite being technically debt free, Alberta still had a massive infrastructure debt to contend with. If I recall correctly, this was dismissed as whiny communist nonsense by Klein and his always-open-to-suggestion Alberta PC party, but it seems their chickens have come home to roost. Unfortunately the rest of us have to actually pay for this, but I digress.

So, when you think about it, about 80% of the increases were pretty predictable. To me, the truly interesting thing about this budget is that it serves as further proof that Albertans seem to like the idea of being conservative more than they actually like being conservative. Firmly ensconced in the ivory tower located on the left side of the political spectrum, even I'm getting worried about these year-over-year spending increases -- but the supposedly government-hating people of Alberta just elected the living shit out of the government pumping them out.

It's also interesting to see things like the ministry of the environment getting 120% increase to its budget, and people like this guy getting excited about publicly-subsidized culture. Lloyd Snelgrove has a good quote in this CBC story that further adds to this sentiment:

... Treasury Board President Lloyd Snelgrove questioned whether Albertans are ready to accept a cut in government spending.

"None of the universities, none of the hospitals, none of the school boards, none of the towns and counties and cities have said to us: Take some money back from us and put in the bank — we have no more need for it."

Don't get me wrong -- it makes me happy to think that Albertan's might not be as conservative as they like to talk about being. It makes me sad, though, to think that we have a positively meagre Heritage Savings Trust Fund and face the possibility of deficits in the near-to-medium term. Come on, Alberta conservatives: where are the calls for penny pinching? Have you wasted all your energy denying climate change or what?

Good news, for a change.

The Alberta Electric System Operator currently has applications from several companies to generate a total 10,500 megawatts of wind power. Given that the AESO is forecasting the need for an additional 5,000 megawatts of power over the next 10 years, this is excellent news! Kudos to the Stelmach government for finally lifting Alberta's asinine wind power cap last year.

This begs the question, why do we need nuclear in Alberta? Especially given the latest news from Bruce Power.

In the news

Lots of interesting stuff going on today. Here is a roundup of links:

Photo: Globe and Mail

The Globe and Mail has a good article detailing the 'in and out' scheme the Conservative Party of Canada allegedly used during the last election to finance national campaign advertising and exceed their allowable spending under the Elections Act by over $1 million dollars (and has resulted in yesterday's RCMP and EC raid of their headquarters). According to the Ottawa Citizen, this is the first time in Canadian history that a political party headquarters has been searched by the RCMP. I always new PM Harper would be a path breaker.

UPDATE: CBC's Politics with Don Newman is reporting that the RCMP are executing a criminal search warrant, granted by a Toronto criminal court at the request of Elections Canada. In fact, the ongoing search may have nothing to do with the 'in and out' scheme investigation and this may just be an attempt on the CPC to mask the real reason the cops are there.

Alberta Health and Wellness minister, Ron Liepert, has laid out his plan for the next year. The press release is seemingly benign. Some highlights include expansion of addiction and mental health services and a renewed strategy for regional health planning by June 15th. As they say though, the devil is in the details (and also the forthcoming provincial budget). I'd expect some healthcare-related controversy when Alberta Health's 'long term sustainability' plan is released in 9 months, if not sooner. Especially given Liepert's stated support for the Manzankowski and the 2006 Health Policy Framework reports and his general lust for 1990s-style, slash and burn budget cuts.

The Edmonton Journal's Todd Babiak has changed his tune (somewhat) on Edmonton's bid for the National Portrait Gallery. His column yesterday paints quite the rosy picture of a revitalized downtown arts and culture district. I like to think his newfound optimism is the direct result of  reading this blog...

Maude Barlow and the Council of Canadians warns that if Canada doesn't revist NAFTA, Canadian governments can expect litigation by foreign oil companies if ever a water shortage were to halt oil and gas production.

Health Canada looks ready to ban bisphenol A. This endocrine disruptor mimics the effect of estrogen and has been linked to breast and prostate cancer. The bad news is that bisphenol A is in many clear plastic bottles (water bottles, water cooler jugs, clear/tinted nalgene bottles) and it is also used to line tin cans. The good news is that it can be avoided somewhat. See Green Edmonton for advice on that.

Finally, this gem. Apparently Vancouver transit cops have been tasering fare-cheaters. Even the non-violent ones. SHADY.

Am I the only one not looking forward to this?

This afternoon marked the beginning of the first legislative session in our new, largely opposition-free government, and I for one am not too excited. Many of the bills on tap (see this pre-session preview in the Herald) are relatively benign, and some I would even support in principle; a ban on talking on a hand-held cellphone while driving, a crack down on street racing (I'm neither 2 fast nor 2 furious), and an increase in penalties for animal cruelty aren't things I can't agree with*.

The thing that has me shaking in my boots, though, is all of the tough talk that's been coming from the direction of Ron Liepert. Since about 15 minutes after being named minister of health, Liepert has making sure everyone in the province knows that he's a man who prefers action to talk by a very large margin. He's also been intimating that he's not going to be afraid to ruffle a few feathers (read: completely ignore the opinions of broad swaths of stakeholders) to quench this thirst for action, which is likely true if his performance as education minister can be used as any guide.

Action in itself is fine enough. But when someone is chomping at the bit to implement reforms inspired by the amazingly poorly-executed and devastating Klein cuts of the early 1990s, and has shown himself to be a steadfast ideologue by ignoring a torrent of evidence to the contrary and choosing the P3 model for the construction of new schools in the province apparently on the basis of one of the 3 "P"s standing for  "private," I'm somewhat worried about what he'll cook up.

Health care is definitely going to be the big issue this session, but as Dave Hancock said in one of the stories linked to above, "to a certain extent, legislatures take on their own life." It will be interesting see what the Tories get up to this time around, but I have a feeling I'm going to enjoy it a lot less than the last session. As is pointed out in this story, it's likely that Stelmach (and, by extension, his government), in light of his crushing mandate, will be a lot less worried about pissing people off, which will mean less hilarious blunders and more aggressive moves on issues that us at AGRDT have a tendency to write angry polemical rants about.

I guess we'll see. Here's hoping that Liepert hasn't delisted childbirth by the end of this session.

*I mean, I'd rather they spend their time on things a little more pressing than street racing as the global economic situation grows ever more dire and the northern half of our province is stripmined, but I learned long ago that looking towards the future isn't really a forte of the Alberta PC