Sunday, June 5, 2011

Video: Interview with PC Leadership candidate Doug Griffiths

Nation, in early February I had a chance to sit down with Doug Griffiths, MLA for Battle River-Wainwright, to talk about his vision for the province of Alberta going forward. Griffiths had announced only the day before that he would be seeking the PC leadership, and his team had quickly set up a "Social Media Breakfast", which was attended by several blogging luminaries from the Calgary area.

Turns out they had a spare seat, so I was invited, too. ;)

Griffiths will be getting the "Full Savaging" later on, in terms of a full candidate profile (as will ALL of the PC Leadership contenders), but considering I finally figured out how to fix the "brightness" issue on the video I recorded (too bad I couldn't fix the "stammering interviewer" issue, but Microsoft Movie Maker only lets you do so much), I thought it better to get the video up sooner, rather than later.

I want to make it clear that, as always, my coverage of these contenders should not in any way be construed as an endorsement. I am willing - HAPPY, in fact - to meet with every PC Leadership candidate - Liberal leadership contenders too, for that matter - when they're in the Calgary area. Informed voters make better choices, and I want Albertans of ALL political stripes to make the best choices possible, so consider this an open invitation. I don't mind putting the work in, if it helps my fellow citizens make their decisions.  I'm working on scheduling with the Mar and Redford camps right now. Everyone else - I'm easy to find. (Hint: Email's in my blogger profile)

So, without any further ado...  Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere's Griffiths (in 2 parts due to duration limits, works out to JUST over 15 minutes)...



Sunday, May 29, 2011

When Free Speech Crosses The Line

You all know I'm a man with opinions.

I have ideas that are in keeping with the political party I've chosen to support. I have ideas that are very different, and I defend them vociferously. I'm always happy to debate those ideas, and listen to the ideas of others.

Sometimes, though, it's not possible to come to an agreement. Sometimes, you have to agree to disagree. Sometimes, the other person isn't interested in compromise. Heck, sometimes - very rarely - I'm not interested in compromise. And so you end in a stand-off. This is the reality of adult conversation.

I've long been opposed to the co-opting of public figures' images, names or internet identities for partisan gain under the guise of "satire". I didn't like it when Ed Stelmach's domain name was snapped up. I didn't like it when fake Stelmach and Ted Morton id's popped up on Twitter. Those are elected officials, and they're fair game for criticism. I get that. Bloggers are no less public, and that's by our choice. We choose to step out of the shadows, stand on a soap-box, and proclaim our thoughts to the masses. So, we're fair game for disagreement at all times, and for ridicule when we deserve it.

All that said, though, it's still not okay in my mind to co-opt someone's identity to try and embarrass them. So it was with great trepidation that I saw recently someone had started a fake account on Twitter for my friend and fellow blogger Christina Rontynen. Christina did a great job of turning the other cheek, and even considered it something of a badge of honour that she had been considered a big enough threat to have warranted a "spoof account". This reaction denied the offender that which they were most probably seeking: The chance to be hurtful to the object of their scorn and ridicule.

My disgust at the appearance this weekend of a hideously named Twitter account meant to ridicule Jane Morgan is palpable. I know that, as a staunch advocate of free speech, Jane is going to let this roll off her back like water on a duck. But the clearly degrading language used to describe this earnest and passionate Albertan is completely unacceptable in a civilized society. The account suggests it may be the work of someone in her own party, but that could just as easily be a red herring. Whether the account is related to the Wildrose nomination battle in Calgary-Klein (nee North Hill), a result of someone from another partisan bent trying to get their shots in anonymously, or just some coward with a keyboard and a lot of free time is beside the point. It's name-calling in an attempt to be hurtful. It's something children do. And my friend Jane is many things - but "childish" is not one of them. She won't give this coward the satisfaction.

I have had the pleasure of meeting many of the political bloggers here in Alberta, from across the entire political spectrum. I count some of them - regardless of their affiliation - among my closer friends. We disagree on many things - but we disagree and debate those differences with respect, and in full sentences. It was a pleasant shock to me that when many of us were invited by Wildrose Alliance blogger The Alberta Altruist to join him in a suite at the Saddledome for a Calgary Flames game this past season, we all GOT ALONG. Not just those of us who were inclined to agree with each other before we met - ALL of us. Even Shane. Because we're grown-ups, and we can disagree without being disagreeable.

Jane says things sometimes that are inaccurate. She says things sometimes that are ill-advised, or that she shouldn't have said. You know who else does that, sometimes? Me. And Dave Cournoyer. And Ken Chapman. And Shane Byciuk. And DJ Kelly. And Jeremy Zhao. And Alheli Picazo. And the Alberta Altruist. And Dan Arnold. And Dan Pagan. And Kirk Schmidt. And Alex Muir. And Christina Rontynen. And Peter Pilarski. And Allie Wojtaszek. And Duncan Wojtaszek and Blake Robert, before I put them into retirement. And every other blogger, past and present. We ALL do it. And we're not alone - REAL journalists, who are trained to do this sort of thing and smart enough to insist on PAYMENT to do it, make those mistakes too.

When we DO, we should be called on it. By the general public, and by each other. We have to police ourselves, to keep the public discourse based on reality and civility. It's the responsibility of all of us to hold each other to a high standard, and to speak up when that standard isn't met.

I respect all of the bloggers listed above, and I've been lucky enough to have met many of them. Many of them have very different ideas from me - and that's okay. Because we can respectfully disagree. Because we're adults.

But a spoof account on Twitter made to embarrass or hurt someone's feelings?

That's a child's game.

Grow up.

Saturday, May 28, 2011

Glenn Taylor Elected Alberta Party Leader #abpleader

With 665 votes, Glenn Taylor, Mayor of Hinton, has been elected Leader of the Alberta Party. Taylor will now begin in earnest the joint tasks of setting up his own campaign for MLA in West Yellowhead, and in working with the party's Election Readiness team to try and win a sizable caucus in the next General Election for Alberta - expected in the next 2 years.

Taylor's acceptance speech appears below.

Savage On The Scene: Sue's Big Goodbye at #abpleader

Outgoing Acting Leader of the Alberta Party, Sue Huff, pointed out on stage this afternoon that on his last day in the job Edwin Erickson had performed a rap song on his accordion. Not to be outdone, Sue picked up her guitar and brought the 300 or so convention attendees to their feet with her rendition of "Somewhere Over The Rainbow", a tongue-in-cheek response to criticisms of the party as being based on "rainbows and kitten" sentimentality.

Sue rocks.

If her suggestion that outgoing leaders should sing becomes a party tradition, I want to say to today's eventual winner: When your day comes, I'm available for lessons. ;)

Savage On The Scene: Countdown #abpleader

Nation, in 8 minutes the first round of voting for the Alberta Party leadership closes. Internal estimates put the turn-out at just over 60% - I'll go on the record at 1,280 votes.

Said one source close to one of the campaigns: "The last 10 minutes are the worst. There's nothing to do but wait."

The Taylor campaign has apparently called every single eligible voter, from their phone bank on-site. They're calling through Google, at no cost.

Stay tuned!

Swag Wars: #abpleader

These are some of the goodies that were left on the tables this morning at the Alberta Party Leadership Convention.

The award for "Most Swag" goes to Glenn Taylor. Including a fascinating fortune cookie...

Ahhhhhh...  so THAT'S how the cookie crumbles...

Savage On The Scene: Royer Speech at #abpleader

Royer's introduction talks about his book, which should have been called "Randy's Excellent Political Adventure". Royer is a "political philosopher and visionary" with years of business experience. Bold, courageous, unconventional. Talk of Calgary's municipal election - why, did something interesting happen there? I wasn't paying attention. ;) Paraphrase of the "Boldly Go" intro from Star Trek - you've got my attention now. "How can we see so much excellence in Alberta, yet a government of mediocrity?"

Royer thanks his fellow candidates. Also thanks Dave Taylor and Sue Huff, both of whom draw a standing ovation. Hearkens back to Bible Bill, and to Peter Lougheed. "The Heritage Fund grew and grew, but it has stalled out, and so has the party that has goverened for the last 40 years". Alberta has the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world, but we're talking aobut laying off teachers, line-ups in emergency rooms...  this is not right."

Royer seems to be getting more applause than the other candidates - his speech seems to be designed for "applause pauses". It's having the desired effect.

This party is the greatest thing that has happened to Alberta politics in 2 generations. We need to be more bold - more aggressive. We need to be a leader of these new and exciting ideas. Talks about his experience in the "un-named natural governing party" of Canada. His company had a "department of listening".

"Listening is a means unto an end - it is not an end itself. We have to be prepared to act on it."

Royer wraps up his speech with some French. Interesting choice. The currency of government is the happiness of its people. "This is our time, this is the place, join me in making that change". A lot of love for Royer in the room. Could be an interesting vote...

Savage On The Scene: Easton Speech at #abpleader

After a brief introduction, Easton takes the stage and talks about how important it is to him that the party does things differently, including how all the leadership candidates are pulling in the same direction and sharing some laughs.

Easton takes clear aim at the PC's and the current government. Out of touch, elite, etc - I'm feeling the love. ;)  Talks about his background in Sudbury, moving to Calgary, and working at Mount Royal University. Talks about his work in the business world as well. "I've learned what it takes to lead; I know how to get things done."

Goes over his priorities: Education, including access to post-secondary. Long-term planning, and the Heritage Savings Trust Fund. Protecting the environment "It's not an option for us to do better, it's a requirement". Health-care. Commitment to fully public funded healthcare that "will. not. change. under. my. watch." Talks about aboriginal relations.

"We have to leverage these new political winds - we know there's a desire for change".

Alberta Party needs to do things differently by 1. Discussing reasonable solutions. 2. Employing leading-edge thinking to develop and implement long-term solutions. Takes a shot at the Wildrose.

"I share your vision for a progressive, innovating, world-class Alberta. It's time to dream again".

Savage On The Scene: Maloney Speech at #abpleader

Introduction from Tammy's mom: The day has arrived, and isn't it exciting? "Woot woot", as those Facebook people would say... (laughs)

Throw to a video from Sam Gregory, the young man who spearheaded the Save Our Fine Arts organization. He met Tammy at an event, and fully endorses her for Alberta Party leader.

Tammy's mom continues to heap praise on her daughter, focusing on her heart and collaborative nature. No mention of sneaking out late at night or not doing her chores. Note to self: Under NO circumstances should my mother be allowed near a microphone when I run for office. ;)

Marc from Calgary East comes up to speak next, about the Alberta Party's belief in listening. Leader's job is to "ask questions on our behalf". Leader must be approachable to every Albertan. We have 4 very talented Albertans who represent the best of Alberta leadership. I know every one of them is capable. My choice is the person with the energy, drive and approachability to continue party's meteoric growth. Tammy comes onto the stage.

Maloney starts by thanking fellow candidates, and all in attendance. "I truly believe that no matter who we elect today, we can't make a bad choice - because our party is destined for greatness (big applause)". Talks about her business background, and her experience with the Clinton Foundation. "My heart has led me back home, to an experience with the homeless community in Calgary, I build relationships with street youth to help them enter the job market and not a homeless shelter." She begins to tear up when talking about the Alberta Party, and how for the first time she feels "at home". Speaks about the holistic approach to policy, and that "we WILL form the next government."

Savage On The Scene: Taylor Speech at #abpleader

Glenn Taylor begins by thanking his fellow candidates. Points out that when Peter Lougheed and David King were building a progressive Alberta, he wasn't all that thankful - he was busy skiing (big laughs). Taylor hypes up the strength and growth of the party. Hearkens back to Lougheed again, and mentions the democratic deficit.Talks about why he chose to live in Hinton. Tells the story of working in the sawmill, going back to school, meeting his wife and his kids - the daughter a nurse, the son living at the base of a ski hill ("sometimes the sins of the father are visited upon the son"). His campaign for Hinton council was based on the simple concept of instilling pride through listening. The citizens identified their priorities, and council met them. Will the Alberta Party be defined by the left and the right? Yes. "We will be defined because we are going to make sure that the politics of the past is left behind, and we will do what is right". Mentions his participation in the first Reboot Alberta event in Red Deer, which was attended by people from every party and every part of the political spectrum. Says that "by this time next year, our party will have contested an election". A year from now I intend to be standing here again, as the elected MLA for West Yellowhead - and I want my fellow leadership candidates standing here with me, as part of the Alberta Party caucus.

Savage On The Scene: The Morning Of #abpleader

Nation, after a relatively early night and a morning spent fighting off my hayfever (the battle wages on), I find myself sitting in Salons 8-10 at the Shaw Conference Centre.

The membership of this party is streaming through the doors, on their way to their various tasks or their breakfast tables. The party's President, Chris Labossiere, just stopped by one of the 2 "Blogger Tables" to say hi. Spirits are high, and many of these folks have already cast their ballots via telephone and online. I'm not 100% convinced that's the best course of action before the candidates have had a chance to speak to the convention, but those votes are no less informed than many of those cast in any other party's leadership races.

There's a smoky smell to the air in Edmonton today - I expect that's related to the wildfires that still blaze in many areas to the north. But there's also anticipation in the air, as the party may meet its new leader by 1:15 this afternoon, as the results from the First Ballot are announced.

The voting works as follows:
First Ballot voting is open until 1:00 pm today. Votes will be tallied, and if no candidate has 50% of the vote plus 1, the candidate with the least votes will be dropped off the list, and the remaining 3 candidates will again stand for election, on a second ballot.
Second Ballot voting, if required, will take place in-person at the Shaw Centre, and via telephone and online, from 2:00 pm to 3:00 pm. The results will be tabulated and announced, and if none of the 3 remaining candidates secures 50% of the vote plus 1, the 3rd place candidate will be dropped from the ballot and the final 2 candidates will move on to a third a final round.
Third Ballot voting, if required, will take place from 4:00 pm to 5:00 pm. By my limited grasp of math, I'm pretty sure that with only 2 candidates on the ballot, one of them will certainly have the 50% plus 1 required to be declared the elected Leader of the Alberta Party.

What strikes me most about the people in this room is the relative youth that I see...  in my own party, I tend to spend more time around the youth than anyone else, but it's clear in larger party events that the youth contingent, while passionate, is certainly outweighed by the elder lions (a group towards which I find myself inexorably sliding further and further with each passing year).

As I look around this room, I'm counting about 150 people at breakfast - and maybe 30 of the heads are sporting grey foliage. The party has a provincial board of 24 members, and 18 of them are under the age of 40.

Now, youth isn't EVERYTHING - you've got to be GOOD at running a party, too. And the Alberta Party is still early in the game. But in terms of growth and energy going forward, they're in a place that many parties would love to be: Chock-full of young, passionate volunteers who want to make a difference.

Friday, May 27, 2011

Savage On The Scene: The Night Before #abpleader

Nation, the Savage has landed in Edmonton, and arrived at the Shaw Convention Centre just as the formal program was wrapping up and leadership candidates were making the rounds, kissing the babies (figuratively) and the dogs (literally - there WERE 2 dogs here).

By this time tomorrow, a party leader will be standing here.


I've touched base with the Maloney, Taylor and Easton camps. The candidates have speeches to polish - they've got over 15minutes at the podium tomorrow to convince the voters why they're the right fit for the job. The supporters seem to be bundles of energy, ready to go off and do... something... at a moment's notice. WHAT, exactly, they're supposed to be doing, they're not so sure about.

Cue the Operatives... every party has them. They know your name, even though you've never seen them in your life. You see them smiling at odd times, and then notice the backlight from their cell phone is still glowing in their hand, showing the text message from the manager of their volunteer phone bank. They shake hands with potential supporters, chit-chat for a minute or two, and then grab a campaign volunteer to "work on" you while they power-walk off to put out the most recent fire.

Even for a party that's trying to get rid of "politics as usual", the Operatives have a place. A political party without Operatives is utterly incapable of waging electoral battle. And the Operatives are in for a late night tonight, I think.

Early returns from this evening, announced by the Alberta Party President Chris Labossiere, indicated nearly 30% turn-out of eligible voters. And that's just through internet and phone voting.

A long night indeed.

Those of you here in Edmonton who might need to get ahold of me tonight, know how to. I'm at the Mariott. ;)

Lightning In a Bottle: The Alberta Party Leadership Race

Nation, something you may not know about me is that I agonize over the titles to my blog posts. I try to look for something relevant, funny, and/or understandable. Sometimes, an inability to come up with a good headline will stop me from writing a post altogether. And I always write the title before I write the body.

So, what's with the title to this particular post - "Lightning in a Bottle"?

Essentially, what the Alberta Party is trying to do this weekend with their selection of a leader is to find themselves the "next Naheed": Someone who can lift their party from obscurity and chase down the big dogs. Much as we saw Nenshi do in Calgary, the Alberta Party is going to have to overcome their relatively low profile to challenge the "establishment" parties of the PCs, Liberals, NDP and Wildrose (who, while new themselves, are completely stocked with politicians and operatives from yesteryear) for donations, media attention, and (ultimately) seats.

In order to do this, they need a leader who connects with Albertans. A leader who represents to Albertans exactly what the party membership feel is their most important attribute or focus.

If the membership feels their focus should be on party building, they'll vote a certain way in the leadership contest. If they feel their focus should be on the economy, they'll vote another way. And so on. In essence, we will know how this party defines itself and its priorities by the results of this leadership election.

Tammy Maloney will be elected leader of the Alberta Party if the membership wants to show the party as wearing its heart on its sleeve. Passionate and engaging, Maloney is impossible to dislike. She represents the progressive heart of this party's raison d'etre. She's a tireless worker, and boasts a very impressive resume. She's not afraid to say "I don't know the answer to that" - which would certainly be a change from the politicians of today. Her family's Albertan roots run deep, and the Vauxhall native would do very well at wooing potential party supporters in the rural south and the urban centres.

Glenn Taylor will be elected leader of the Alberta Party if the membership wants to show the party as eschewing "politics as usual". The only candidate to actually have been elected to public office in the past, the sitting Mayor of Hinton has developed a reputation for doing politics differently. He's about pan-generational planning, and building consensus. It also doesn't hurt that he has attracted some pretty high profile endorsements from within the party. The only candidate from north of Airdrie, Taylor would also be a boon to the party's fortunes in the north, particularly in Edmonton and areas to the west.

Randy Royer will be elected leader of the Alberta Party if the membership wants to show the party as being focused on the economy. His evocation of Bill Clinton's famous line "It's the economy, stupid" drew some ire from within the party, however Royer maintains that in order to get Henry and Martha onside with the new party, the focus has to be on ensuring that people can still make a living. It would also help silence the whispered criticisms of the party as being "re-branded Liberals". Royer's deep commitment to bettering Alberta for all of us is clear to anyone who's spoken with him, and he is convinced that his party can win the next general election in Alberta.

Lee Easton will be elected leader of the Alberta Party if the membership wants to embrace whole-heartedly their progressive mantle. His policy positions are clear and read like a progressive hymnal, though what's somewhat less clear is whether the party membership would fully endorse them even if he were to win the leadership. He's a teacher and academic with business experience, who would likely have a lot of appeal in the cities. I wasn't able to connect with Lee during the contest, but I'll try again when I get to the convention this evening.

I'll be doing a lot of posting from the Alberta Party Leadership Convention this weekend, and should be arriving around 8 tonight, so watch this space for updates.

(Rumour has it that Dave Cournoyer of daveberta has challenged me to a cage match. It's gunna get UGLY. Doesn't he remember how I crushed Alberta Tory? ;)

EDIT: The Twitter hashtag for the Leadership Convention is "#abpleader" - I'd suggest following it and #abparty if you prefer to get your updates via Twitter rather than waiting for prime rib-quality analysis from the Enlightened Savage. ;)

Quiet May Weekends...

Nation, there are few things I love more than the ability to kick up my feet for a couple of days in May, listen to the rain, and do absolutely NOTHING.

This weekend will NOT be one of those times.

Indeed, this is one of the busiest weekends we've seen in a looooong time, as far as Alberta's political watchers are concerned.

Gary Mar is making the rounds in Cowtown, hitting Rutherford this morning to announce his municipal funding platform and opening his Calgary Campaign Office to much fanfare on this afternoon at 4:00 pm. Mar seems to have been anointed by the mainstream media as one of the front-runners to replace Ed Stelmach as PC Leader, along with Ted Morton and Alison Redford (the front-runners for PC Leader in 2006, according to the same luminaries, were eventual third-place winner Morton and runner-up Jim Dinning. They also picked Ric McIver to win Calgary's mayoral race, before picking Barb Higgins, before only begrudgingly acknowledging Naheed Nenshi's campaign in its final few weeks - so just because you read it in print, doesn't make it so. And this from a blogger who predicted 50 BQ seats in the 41st General Election.)

The Progressive Conservatives are having a major "Spring Fling" fundraiser in Calgary on Friday night to drum up funds and support for their local constituency associations in Calgary constituencies currently not represented by PC MLA's.  Tickets are still available, but are said to be nearly sold out. Every declared leadership contender will be in attendance, to the best of my knowledge.

The Alberta Liberals are likewise holding a big get together in Calgary on Saturday and Sunday, billed as their Annual Convention and Special General Meeting, with the subtitle of "Politics Reimagined", to talk about where they go from here. Proposed amendments include everything from opening up leadership votes to any Albertan who "registers as a Liberal supporter" (which is, I imagine, not the same as being a party member) to moving from a "one-member, one vote" process to a "weighted delegate" process. Change is in the air, that much is for certain. This hot on the heels of yesterday's announcement by Bruce Payne of his intention to run for the party's leadership under his "87 Strong" campaign for party renewal across the entire province. It should make for an interesting meeting, to say the least. Payne joins sitting MLA's Hugh MacDonald, Laurie Blakeman and Raj Sherman as declared Liberal leadership candidates. The party will choose its new leader on September 10th in Edmonton.

The Alberta Party will be holding its Leadership Convention in Edmonton this weekend as well, with voting taking place online, via telephone, and live on Saturday. The online voting will be closely watched by politicos of all stripes, as other parties and organizations toy with internet voting as a way of improving turnout. I'll be most interested in watching to see if at any point "Kirk Schmidt" is leading the online vote, as that will be a sure sign that security is an issue. Subsequent votes will continue throughout the day if required, until a winner is declared among the 4 candidates. I have been granted Media Accreditation for this event, and will be in attendance Friday night and all day Saturday - so watch this space for interviews and updates as they become available.

No rest for the wicked...  coming later: My impressions of the Alberta Party leadership candidates.

Tuesday, May 24, 2011

Audio: Interview with Alberta Party leadership candidate Randy Royer

Nation, I had a chance to sit down with businessman, author and Alberta Party leadership contender Randy Royer the day after the recent federal election.


The Alberta Party will be choosing a leader in Edmonton this coming week-end, and I have been granted media accreditation. I will be live-blogging the event in this space, so be sure to tune in on Friday night and all day Saturday as the party membership charts the course they intend to take towards the next provincial election.

For more information on the Alberta Party leadership election, click here.
For more information on Randy Royer, click here.

Friday, May 6, 2011

Awesomeness from the Inbox

Nation, this crossed my desk recently from a really nifty blog/social experiment called One Hundred Jobs, and it's too good to pass up.

One Hundred Jobs: Job 87: Get Yer Vote On For LOVE!

The couple in question are friends and colleagues of mine, and I can't reiterate in strong enough terms how deserving they are of this opportunity.

Take a few moments, please, and follow the instructions on One Hundred Jobs in order to lend your social media weight and Facebook vote to Duane and the LONG-suffering Becky.

We all know the impressive weight that comes from the "E.S. Bump". Let's harness the power of the Nation, and get these kids over the top.

Wednesday, May 4, 2011

Audio: Interview with Alberta Party leadership candidate Glenn Taylor

Nation, I recently had the pleasure of sitting down for a chat with Glenn Taylor, third-term Mayor of Hinton and candidate for the leadership of the Alberta Party.  Our discussion appears below.


For more information on the Alberta Party leadership election, click here.
For more information on Glenn Taylor, click here.

Monday, May 2, 2011

#elxn41: You Have Another Choice

Nation, this is usually the time when I get up on my soapbox and exhort you, in the strongest possible terms, to make sure you go out tomorrow and exercise your democratic franchise. That you honour those who fought and died for that right, by making an informed choice at the ballot box.

I really want you to go out to your polling station. I REALLY do.

That's the choice that you always have to make, really: Do I vote, or do I not vote?

After all, it's a binary thing, right? You either got in the car, went to the polling station, and cast a ballot for one of the candidates...  or you stayed home, made some Kraft Dinner, and caught up on some housework. One decision, 2 possible courses of action.

I'm telling you today that you have a third option.

Go to the polling station, and refuse your ballot.

Now, I should be very clear, here: In Federal elections, ballots rejected by the voter are not marked in a separate category, as they are in certain provincial elections (like the ones in Alberta, for example). They go into the same category as "spoiled" ballots - a fact of which I was unaware until recently - as "ballots rejected by the returning officer".

If you didn't find a local candidate you could support in this election...  if no one did you the courtesy of returning your calls, or coming by the house and asking you for the job... if the candidate you were most likely to support didn't come to the all-candidates' forum in your riding...  if you can't bring yourself to cast a ballot for a candidate attached to any of the parties, or their leaders...  I want you to put on your coat tomorrow, drive to the polling station, and when they give you your ballot, I want you to hand it back, get the black border torn off, and drop it - unmarked - into the ballot box.

Your vote counts.

It gets marked down as "rejected" - but, you'd better believe that if 10, 20, or 30% of all ballots cast in the election are "rejected" ballots, the politicians are going to sit up and take notice.

Sick of the way federal politics are done in this country?  Look in the mirror...  the parties run ads like this because they WORK. They behave the way they do in the House of Commons because it WORKS. They give us garbage candidates in a lot of ridings because we ACCEPT the garbage candidates they give us. They run campaigns of flash instead of substance, because we don't demand any better. 50% come out and vote for whatever potted plant they often put in front of us, and 50% stay home, which the parties interpret in any of a thousand ways. But, those who stay home give up their franchise. They lose their chance to send a message. They're asked for their opinion - and they stay silent.

If you've found someone to vote for on May 2nd, good for you - please make sure to go out and vote for them.

If, however, you want to register a REAL protest vote...  don't vote for the second most popular party in your riding. Don't vote for the party you feel most needs the $2 that is attached to your ballot.

Convinced no one has earned your support?

Don't give it to anyone.

You're not limited to "vote or stay home". You have a third choice.

You can reject your ballot, and choose "none of the above".

But get out there, and go to your polling station.

Or go to your local Legion, find a Veteran, and explain why he could go to Korea or Normany, but you can't make the 4-block trip to your local elementary school.

A cast ballot is power and a choice, no matter what mark (if any) is made on it.

A voter who stays home is part of the problem - not part of the solution.

Men and women died so you could make your choice.

So make it.

Saturday, April 30, 2011

#elxn41 Primer: The Results

Nation, I thought I'd save you all the time and trouble of staying up to watch the results on Monday's election - especially since Tweeting the results is against the law (but blogging them seems not to be...  odd...).

Everyone else seems already to have weighed in on how the results are going to work out, and so now it's time to get Savage with some numbers.

A disclaimer first, however: While I DO have the Tories winning the election, that does not necessarily equate to the Tories remaining in government. A lot of very smart people whom I have a tonne of respect for have opined that an emboldened opposition, led by Jack Layton, will very possibly defeat the government at the first opportunity (which I believe is the Throne Speech), and not even wait for a budget. Much hinges on what the wounded Liberals are going to be in the mood for as they decide how quickly they can get the millstone named Michael off from around their necks.

But, all of this is a blog post for Monday night.  TONIGHT, you want a prediction. And here it is.


ALBERTA: CPC 28 seats, all other 0

If you had asked me this yesterday, I'd have said Linda Duncan and Ray Martin had a good chance at holding and extending the NDP beach head in Alberta to 2 seats. But as I've thought more and more about this, I think the average Albertan voter, even in Edmonton, is likely pretty frightened (rightly or wrongly - I think rightly) about what an NDP-led government might mean for Alberta's economy. Those scared voters are coming out on Monday and voting Conservative, because 1 or 2 seats might make the difference when, at the start of the campaign, it was considered safe to toss Jack a couple of bones as a way of protesting against "Mean Stephen".


BRITISH COLUMBIA: CPC 21 seats, LPC 2 seats, NDP 13 seats, Green 0 seats

I think the British Columbian penchant for letting their more small-l liberal roots show will result in a net increase for the NDP here. The biggest news, and the only riding in BC that many will be watching, is Sannich-Gulf Islands. I just don't think Elizabeth May has the juice to beat Gary Lunn here. I expect she'll lose by at least 5,000 votes, and then the Greens are going to have to take a good, long look at themselves in the mirror about what to do next, and who should lead them.


SASKITOBA: CPC 22 seats, LPC 1 seat, NDP 5 seats, Green 0 seats

I expect Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar, which the Conservatives won by 300 votes, will swing to the NDP. Ralph Goodale will hold onto Wascana for the Liberals by a slim margin - but make no mistake, those voters are voting for Ralph, not the Liberal brand.


ATLANTIC CANADA: CPC 6 seats, LPC 8 seats, NDP 18 seats, Green 0 seats

The NDP surge here hurts the Tories AND the Liberals. Peter MacKay hangs onto Central Nova, which puts him close to the California border (by his reckoning, anyhow). PEI remains a Liberal bastion.


THE NORTH: CPC 0 seats, LPC 1 seat, NDP 2 seats, Green 0 seats

Tory Minister of Health Leona Aglukkaq is in for a fight with the NDP candidate, Jack Hicks. I expect Hicks to win based on lingering resentment over Aglukkaq's last campaign. Of course, when a riding is so vastly spread out as the 3 northern ridings, Get Out The Vote efforts are critically important, and the Conservatives have the edge there, so it WILL be close. No change in the Yukon - the incumbent Liberal Larry Bagnell is very popular.


QUEBEC: CPC 7 seats, LPC 6 seats, NDP 12 seats, BQ 50 seats, Green 0 seats

Much noise has been made about the NDP's surge in Quebec, and many Quebeckers who had previously voted for the CPC, the Liberals, and the Bloc are going to cast NDP ballots this time around. However, to my mind the lion's share of these new NDP supporters were previous supporters of the other federalist parties - the Tories and the Liberals. And the loss of those votes to the NDP is going to create space for the Bloc, despite running a relatively poor campaign, to take a handful of seats that they had been in close contention for in 2008.


ONTARIO: CPC 65 seats, LPC 17 seats, NDP 24 seats, Green 0 seats

This is going to be a catastrophe for the Liberal Party. Concerns about the economy will push voters to Harper, and concerns about social programs will push voters to Layton. NOTHING is pushing voters in Ontario into the waiting arms of Michael Ignatieff, and they're going to lose over half of their seats in Ontario as it serves as a microcosm of the Liberal Party's nationwide slide - in this election, anyhow - into "also-ran" status. A dozen of their 17 Ontario seats will be in the GTA.


THE FINAL NUMBERS:

Conservative Party of Canada: 149 seats (143 at dissolution)
New Democratic Party of Canada: 74 seats (36 at dissolution)
Bloc Quebecois: 50 seats (47 at dissolution)
Liberal Party of Canada: 35 seats (77 at dissolution)


So there. Those are the results. On paper, it's a Conservative minority. Go to bed early on Monday - you'll need your energy to get through a week of "evil Layton-led coalition" and "is Harvard hiring?" punditry and smarm.

#elxn41: You Don't Know Jack

Nation, it was only a matter of time.

As soon as I saw the polling numbers rising for the NDP, I knew it was only a matter of time before some deep, dark secret in Jack Layton's ancient past creeped into the light - coincidentally, I'm sure.

Of course, every party is going to claim that they would *never* stoop to such depths, and that the only tie they MIGHT have to such info is if it were revealed to Sun Media by one of their supporters without their prior knowledge...  a claim that I'm sure most Canadians will believe, as the parties have no reason to LIE about such things...

At least we have a list longer than one potential culprit... The Tories are trying to fight off the NDP in Ontario, the BQ is trying to fight them off in Quebec, and the Liberals are trying to fight them off in 308 ridings. So the "whodunit" game will at least be entertaining.

But the allegations are unsubstantiated crap.

That's right - I said it.

Now, let's be perfectly clear: I'm not a Jack Layton fan. And I'm about as likely to cast a ballot for my local NDP candidate on Monday as I am to sprout wings and fly around the polling station terrifying villagers. This is not a politically-motivated defence of Layton.

What it IS, is a REALITY-based defence of Layton.

Here's what happened:

Toronto Police, in 1996, entered a licensed massage parlour in Toronto's Chinatown looking for underage prostitution and sex acts. What they FOUND was city councillor John (Jack) Layton, in a second floor studio, naked and mellow with an attractive masseuse in the room.

The masseuse, whose mastery of English is suspect (based on the notes taken by police) became flustered during questioning.

Layton, when asked if he knew of sex acts being performed on the premises, responded "No, sir.". Asked if he himself had received any, he replied "No sir, I was just getting a shiatsu."

Which is EXACTLY how this would have gone if he were 100% innocent. Layton was never charged with anything - which, considering the political climate at the time and the fact that Toronto Police considered him anti-cop, is probably a pretty good sign that they had not a SHRED of evidence of any wrongdoing on his part.

And make no mistake: This same scene could be repeated anywhere, with anyone who receives a massage.

Case in point: I went for a therapeutic massage last week in Calgary (an excellent place - if you're looking in SE Calgary, email me for their details). If one of my blogging arch-nemeses (say, Alberta Tory or Alheli Picazo) were to have found out about my appointment and sent a tip in to cops, here's what they would have found when they burst into the massage studio:

"Enlightened Savage was lying on a table, covered by a towel. He later indicated he was told to get into "whatever state of undress he was most comfortable with". Client was partially covered in oil, and had been receiving services from an attractive (college-educated and licensed) massage therapist. When asked if he was receiving sexual services, Savage responded 'Are you flipping kidding me? Blue Cross would NEVER cover that! My lower back's killing me and I'm here for a massage!'. When asked if he was aware of sexual acts being performed on the premises, Savage responded 'Seriously? That kind of thing really happens?!? I thought Shane at CalgaryRants was bluffing... No. I was unaware. Now go bug someone else please.'"
SCANDAL! the blogs would scream the next day, outing me as some sort of deviant or misanthrope. "He doesn't respect women!" others would scream. The only problems with those assertions being a) nothing actually HAPPENED, and b) I've never requested a specific masseuse in my life, and just as frequently find a male therapist trying to work on my back and messed-up hip as I find a female one. It's luck of the draw. Male, female, attractive, not...  I don't care. I'm not there to look. I'm there for a massage. Do I hold my chiropractor to some sort of sexual or aesthetic standards? Hardly. (Sorry Dr. S, you're an awesome guy but I just don't feel that way about you!)

Look...  if you want to talk about why Layton's policies would be potentially devastating to the Albertan or Canadian economy, let's have that discussion. If you want to debate the qualifications of his candidates, that's fine. His readiness to lead? I'll talk about that all day.

But Jack Layton received a massage in 1996, and he was naked?

Come on.

REALLY?

No wonder people hate politics.

Thursday, April 28, 2011

#elxn41 Primer: Conservative Party

Five Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Six Hundred Minutes...

Give or take, depending on orbital wobble, that's how many minutes are in one calendar year.  Criticisms about the amount of time Parliament sits (or doesn't) in a given year notwithstanding, it is worth mentioning that the Stephen Harper Government (TM) has been the longest-lived minority government in Canadian history.

Of course, our man Stephen isn't satisfied with being a trivia answer...  he wants to wield REAL power... he wants his majority. And it almost worked out that way... in fact, it still might.

Today's Special: Tory-ander Chickpea Salad

Stephen had it all planned out...  the Liberals under Ignatieff were stagnant in the polls. The Greens were a non-factor to voters who couldn't spell the word "patchouli". The Bloc was facing a backlash against separatist sentiment in Quebec. And the NDP was the NDP. It was the perfect storm... a passed budget would give Harper a mandate from Parliament to push his agenda forward for the year. A budget failure would trigger an election, and almost certainly an increase in seats for his Tories - maybe even into majority territory. Everything was going according to plan...

And then Jack happened.

This isn't to say that the surging NDP are going to form government - although, it's not outside the realm of possibilities. For that matter, the Tories could still capture a majority or minority government, as result of some of the idiosyncrasies of our first-past-the-post system. National polling numbers, while interesting, don't mean much to the people in Goose Bay or Wasa or Acme.

Where the Harper Tories made their first mistake was in assuming that because Ignatieff was stuck in the mud, they were in the clear. Their first major announcement - that tax relief was coming to families within the next 5 years - was akin to Wimpy's old line "I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today". I effect, the Tories promised tax relief in 5 years in exchange for your vote on May 2nd - and probably at least one more time after that, as well.

They've stayed quiet on a lot of fronts, hoping for opposition stumbles. While this is usually sound strategy, especially when your opponents are as likely to stumble as the divided Liberal camp and the NDP, it results in next to no momentum - a decision which is coming home to roost in the final days of the campaign.


The Tories are rightly pointing out that Canada is the envy of the first world when it comes to our position emerging from the global economic downturn - our public finances are relatively strong, although a strong dollar relative to the U.S. greenback is hurting Canadian exports. Unemployment is much lower than many of our neighbours, and the stimulus spending that the Tories championed seems - on the surface, at least - to be having the desired results.


Likewise, opposition attacks against the Tories have been far too "inside" to resonate with average Canadian voters - arguments about contempt of Parliament or fighter jets or spending on prisons is fine when you're sitting around a poker table with your fellow policy wonks, but Henry and Martha don't generally care which politicians have been found in contempt of Parliament - truth be told, it's a pretty accurate description of how many Canadians feel about the institution, when they pay attention to the goings-on in Ottawa.

But despite the general satisfaction with the job the Tories have done, they haven't captured the imagination of the populace. "Things are pretty good - let's not change anything" is hardly the stirring motto that the Tory War Room was hoping for. And while the Liberals were the only opposition the Tories were facing, the reality is that the Conservatives were campaigning LESS badly than the Grits, so a majority was inching closer to closer to fruition.

Now, with the NDP making significant gains in British Columbia and Quebec - both provinces where the Tories were hoping to wrest seats from the Liberals - the results are somewhat less sure. Conservatives in ridings they consider "safe" are tending to avoid all-candidates' forums, to the chagrin of local voters.

A result of the conscious choice to run the Tory campaign under the radar? Surely.

A bad gamble? Not necessarily.

The voters will decide on May 2nd.

But if the unthinkable happens, and Jack Layton is measuring the Prime Minister's Office for drapes on May 3rd, expect a very significant number of Albertan Tories to take a good, long look about what steps they can take to protect their home province's energy reserves from the new federal government.

Bloc Albertois, anyone?

Conservative Party of Canada - Website
Conservative Policies
Find your local Conservative candidate

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

#elxn41 Primer: New Democratic Party

Banners and signs are waved as rock music plays in the packed hall. The beaming leader, flush with polling numbers that put him in a statistical tie for first place in La Belle Province, shakes hands and speaks of upcoming campaign stops in Atlantic Canada, British Columbia and the Northwest Territories - all places he expects to win seats.

And then, in a moment of clarity, the face of that leader reveals itself...

Oh. My. God.

Is that...?

Could it be...?

That's Jack Layton.


Today's Special: Dipped Nuts
The NDP has long served as the socialist conscience of Canada's parliament - it helped Pierre Trudeau's minority government form the state-owned Petro-Canada in the early 1970s, before helping to defeat that same government and force an election - in which their caucus was halved. Less than a decade later, they brought down the minority government of Joe Clark. In 1993, the party caucus was reduced by voters to 9 seats. And here we are in 2011, 8 years after Jack Layton was elected party leader, and the party sits with 37 seats in a 308-member House of Commons. An impressive recovery, but still a parliamentary afterthought, right?

Wrong.

The NDP's messaging has been consistent. Much like the Bloc in Quebec, the NDP has made it clear time and again that they would work with any party - ANY party - that would bring forward ideas that they believe would benefit Canadians. Of course, these ideas would have to be visible through the orange-tinted glasses of the NDP, but all the same, while political operatives decry this approach as "opportunism" and a willingness to "get into bed with whomever it takes to gain power", Canadian voters increasingly seem to recognize that sort of approach as "co-operation" - the same kind of thing we have to do every day, and the same kind of thing we teach our kids to do. As a result, recent polls show the NDP in a statistical tie with Canada's "natural ruling party", the Liberals, for 2nd place in popular support nation-wide.

The NDP campaign to this point has been focused on 2 main themes: Firstly, that Stephen Harper favours his business and oilpatch friends over ordinary Canadians, and secondly that Michael Ignatieff and the Liberals are absentee enablers of the Harper government's policies. The strategy seems to be working, as voters who in past elections have voted Liberal to "stop the Tories" have seemingly swung to Layton and the NDP, at the expense of Ignatieff's Liberals.

An Ipsos-Reid poll of the leadership attributes of the federal party leaders illustrated how Canadians have come to feel about Layton, the longest-serving leader of a federalist party in this election:

  •  Someone you can trust: Jack Layton (34%, 2nd place)
  •  Someone who will get things done: Jack Layton (27%, 2nd place)
  •  Someone who has what it takes to lead Canada: Jack Layton (26%, 2nd place)
  •  Someone who is best to manage during tough economic times: Jack Layton (22%, 2nd place)
  •  Someone who wants to be Prime Minister for the right reasons: Jack Layton (34%, 2nd place)
  •  Someone who has a vision of Canada that you can support: Jack Layton (30%, 2nd place)

In many of these instances, Layton is at least 10% ahead of Michael Ignatieff. This situation seems absolutely shocking, given the relatively small population of Canada that tends to lean far enough to the political left to be within the NDP wheelhouse. But Canadians are likely embracing Layton more than his party: Here's a guy who a year ago came out and revealed he's getting treatment for prostate cancer, and is on the hustings with a cane because of a recent hip fracture, yet for all the world he seems more energetic and engaged than any of his relatively healthy competitors. He speaks with passion, he's personable, charming, and was the first political leader to appear on the new (right-leaning) Sun News Network. He's got no fear and no quit in him, and people admire that, even if they'd normally be inclined to dismiss his policies or record.
Now, the Layton Love aside, the NDP policy book reads more or less exactly like you'd assume. Big business = bad. Labour = good. Working families. Kitchen tables. Doctors. Trees. Conservative boogymen. They include a costing document, which Michael Ignatieff has since described as "science fiction" - the Alberta oilpatch had better hope it stays that way, since there are almost $9 Billion in increased revenues to the government projected in the NDP plan from corporate tax hikes and what the Dippers are calling "an end to fossil fuel subsidies".  All in all, the NDP platform reads like instructions on how to completely devastate the Albertan economy - a fact that I'm sure makes the incumbent MP for Edmonton-Strathcona, Linda Duncan of the NDP, VERY excited.

But Jack Layton's not running for Premier of Alberta, and the politics of division works fine everywhere you're not targeting. Look at the NDP polling numbers in Quebec and BC, for example.

The notion of an NDP majority government is still a LONG ways off... but if Layton can propel his party into the second spot in a minority Parliament, then (depending on how the other parties fare) he might be one simple meeting away from a rainmaker spot propping up a Tory government...  or the Prime Minister's Office, if a formal coalition could be formed with the Liberals.

Prime Minister Jack Layton.

Don't say I didn't warn you. ;)

New Democratic Party of Canada - Website
NDP Policies
Find your local NDP candidate

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

#elxn41 Primer: Liberal Party

The Federal Liberal campaign has become about one man, and one man only: Michael Ignatieff. Or, as this pundit refers to him, "Canada's John Kerry".

Why Ignatieff has had so much trouble connecting with the Canadian public is going to be a subject that in coming years makes a lot of authors a lot of money. Is it that he seems too professorial? Does he come across as cold? Did Tory efforts to define him in the media leave a lasting impression?

At the end of the day, the Liberal Party of Canada - the party that is usually a sneeze away from power if not actually occupying 24 Sussex Drive (as they have for 78 of Canada's 144 years) - is polling neck-and-neck with the NDP for 2nd place, nationally. They've been relegated to also-rans in Quebec polls. And the fingers of blame are being pointed, rightly or wrongly, at Michael Ignatieff.

Today's Special: Runny Grits

The Liberals in 2008 were supposed to cruise to an easy victory. Stephen Harper's Conservatives had just broken the spirit of their fixed election dates law, if not the letter of it. The Liberals had just come out of a Winnipeg caucus retreat with a renewed sense of purpose. The Canadian public viewed the Conservatives as better equipped to handle the economy, but the Liberals as better prepared to deal with environmental issues. The Liberals, sensing the direction of the wind, prepared a major platform plank called "The Green Shift". Elizabeth May, leader of the Green Party, had essentially endorsed the Liberals as the best party to lead government. Danny Williams, the wildly popular Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador, was spearheading an "Anything But Conservative" campaign.

The reality of the outcome proved quite different. A disastrous performance by freshly-minted leader Stephane Dion resulted in a net loss for the Liberals of 18 seats. While every major party saw reduced voter turn-out (with the notable exception of the Green Party), the Liberals lost nearly 850,000 votes versus their results in 2006. 6 days after the election, Dion announced his intention to resign as party leader. The resulting leadership convention saw the coronation of Michael Ignatieff as the new leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

Fast forward to 2011, and we see a Liberal Party that, again, should be doing much better than they seem to. Whether it's the fault of the leader of of the people running the party machinery, the party isn't connecting with average Canadians. They're perceived as a party that would be bad news for the economic recovery, their early campaign focus on the Harper government being found in contempt of Parliament was "inside baseball" of the worst possible kind, and their criticisms of Harper seem to fall on deaf ears as "the same old stuff we've been hearing for years". And to top it off, much of the campaign has seen Canadians trying to determine if, in fact, Ignatieff would enter a coalition government with the NDP and Bloc or not - the answer went from "no" to "maybe" to "possibly, but our parliamentary rules allow it and can we call it something else?".

The Liberals have made Family a central plank in their platform, with the release of a 2 year, $8 Billion spending commitment for programs from Post-Secondary Education and Childcare to Home Renovations. The Liberals argue that, unlike the Conservative Party proposals, their policies can be instituted right away to help families, and not years down the road. Their plans are fully costed, and they claim they can pay for the programs without any increase to the GST or personal income tax rates - a claim that the Conservatives find laughable.

While the national campaign has been less than stellar, all is not lost for the Grits. On a local level, they have a lot of grizzled, veteran operatives who know how to win. They're targeting ridings they consider "winnable" - particularly those that don't have incumbent Tories running in them, that the Tories seem to be taking for granted, or with what they're calling "absentee candidates" (Tories who are not participating in candidates' forums). In the Calgary area, the Liberals have high hopes for Calgary-Centre North, vacated by Jim Prentice several months ago. It's not LIKELY to yield a good result for them, but how likely was Edmonton-Strathcona to elect Linda Duncan in 2008?
History shows us it's exceedingly difficult to fight a political war with legitimate threats on two fronts. We saw it with the old Progressive Conservatives, when Kim Campbell had to fend off Jean Chretien's Liberals on her left and Preston Manning's Reformers on her right. This is the unfamiliar situation the Liberals find themselves in today, attacking the Harper Tories on the right while trying to make the case that Jack Layton and the NDP shouldn't be considered a viable choice. Some polls show them running FOURTH in Quebec - a result that was unfathomable just 5 years ago.

A week is an eternity in Canadian politics - and it had better be. Because if the Grits are going to make a move here and have a shot at bringing Stephen Harper down at the ballot box instead of in the Governor General's sitting room - they've got a lot of work to do, and 6 days left to do it.

Liberal Party of Canada - Website
Liberal Policies
Find your local Liberal candidate

Monday, April 25, 2011

#elxn41 Primer: Green Party

Nation, this is the first is a series of posts that will go up daily leading to Election Day on May 2nd. I'll be profiling the 4 federalist parties and their campaigns thus far, in reverse order of their popular support according to the latest polls.

If it seems as though I'm a little down on ALL the parties and their performances in this campaign...  well, you're not imagining that.

The schedule will be as follows:
Monday, April 25th - Green Party
Tuesday, April 26th - Liberal Party
Wednesday, April 27th - New Democratic Party
Thursday, April 28th - Conservative Party

Today's special: Mixed Greens.

The Green Party finds itself in a VERY different position in 2011 than it did during the last General Election. In 2008, the party was riding as high as it had ever been, with a sitting Member of Parliament (not elected as a Green, but sitting as one nonetheless), a spot in the Leader's Debates as a result of that MP, and polling near the double-digits. There was even cautious optimism among party insiders that leader Elizabeth May might be able to unseat Conservative Party rock star Peter MacKay in Central Nova, where she had spent many years as a youth and where she decided to run.

Reality, though, hit the party like a tonne of bricks as the election results came in. While they had increased their voter numbers nationwide greater than any other party, and by over 41% versus their results in 2006, they still registered less than 7% of the national popular vote, and found themselves once again shut out of the House of Commons.  May herself scored a personal victory, capturing 32% of the vote in Central Nova (where the Liberals had declined to run a candidate against her) however she still lost the race to the entrenched MacKay by over 5,600 votes.

Fast forward to 2011, now, and let's take a look at the growth of the Greens. Whereas they scored 6.8% of the popular vote in 2008, now in 2011 they sit at... 6%. Elizabeth May - still Green Party leader after a controversial constitutional change within the party - is running in a Vancouver Island riding, where her party polls the highest, giving them their best chance yet at winning a seat in the House of Commons. May was shut out of the Leader's Debates on account of her party's lack of a sitting Member of Parliament (a decision which disappointed many, this blogger included).

While it's hardly surprising that the Green Party got their largest share of the popular vote in British Columbia in 2008, it's borderline shocking that their second strongest province, by the same measure, was Alberta.  That's right - Alberta. Home of those awful "tar-sands", and rednecks who only care about green issues when the green being discussed is the ink on the $20 bill. Home of greedy corporations who plunder Mother Nature. THAT Alberta.

Well, the Greens are working to correct the issue this time, coming out strongly in favour of corporate tax hikes and a carbon tax. Which should do them WONDERS with their popular support in Alberta. "Thanks for the votes in 2008. p.s., get bent."

The Green Party policy book has a lot of very good "what"'s - that is to say, "Here's how life should be, and would be under a Green government". What it lacks is "how"'s - How do we actually achieve the goals as outlined?
The knock against the Greens has long been that they're a group of environmental activists, trying to run a political party against parties that are run by - wait for it - politicians. Candidates are often (but not always) exactly what you'd expect: Bright-eyed students, or bleary-eyed former hippies (the candidate in Calgary-Southwest, running against Stephen Harper, is trumpeted on the Green website as "an active member of the Calgary 420 Cannabis Community"). They increased their profile, though not necessarily their legitimacy in the public eye, with the July 2010 appointment of recently retired NHL enforcer Georges Laraque to the position of Male Deputy Leader.

The party has grown steadily in membership and support since Elizabeth May's first election as leader in 2006 - however, patience is reportedly wearing thin among Green Party donors and supporters. Many eyes on election night will be on May's suburban Victoria riding, where she's taking on notable Tory Gary Lunn. It will be a chance for May to prove that her party made the right decision in extending her term as leader. Possibly... the last chance.

Green Party of Canada - Website
Green Policies
Find your local Green candidate

Sunday, April 24, 2011

The Leadership Race That Wasn't: Alberta's Progressive Conservatives

Nation, while the Federal election has been garnering the lion's share of the attention in these parts, you could be forgiven for not realizing that there are, in fact, 3 leadership races going on on the provincial political scene in Alberta.

Or, rather, 2 leadership races going on.

The Alberta Liberals are in the process of selecting a leader to replace the outgoing Dr. David Swann, whom despite his inherent decency and palpable intelligence, never caught on with the electorate. Swann will go down in history as one of the few duly elected Leaders of the Official Opposition to never actually contest a General Election as a party leader.

The Alberta Party, likewise, is in the throes of a leadership contest, as they choose a leader to helm their fledgling party through the uncertain waters of the next General Election in Alberta, which has been predicted as taking place any time after March of 2012.

Arguably, though, the highest-profile leadership race is the one that isn't going on - at least, not officially.  The Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta, better known as the PC Party of Alberta, is the party that currently forms government in this province. Their leader, Premier Ed Stelmach, announced to much surprise in late January that he will not be seeking re-election and that he would be stepping aside as party leader once a replacement was chosen.

HOWEVER, the party won't be choosing a replacement until Ed hands a letter to the PC Association President formally informing him of his intention to resign as leader. Which won't be happening until after the spring sitting of the Legislative Assembly - after all, "the people's work" still needs doing. So...  while they don't yet know who will be leading them into the next election, the PC's still have a leader today - Ed Stelmach.

This point was reiterated in an email that was recently sent to PC Party members by the party's president, Bill Smith, when he pointed out that the party DID, in fact, have a leader, and that leader's name was Ed Stelmach. And that there was no leadership race taking place at this time. Which is technically true - and may, in fact, be having a direct impact on how much (or, more accurately, how little) public campaigning for the job we're seeing from sitting MLA's like Ted Morton, Alison Redford, Doug Griffiths and Doug Horner.

Of course, this isn't stopping Klein-era cabinet minister Gary Mar from campaigning, after having given up his job promoting Alberta to the power brokers in Washington, DC in order to come home and run for the job. And neither is it stopping speculation on the street, in the coffee shops and on the internet about who ELSE may be running for the leadership, when the party actually declares the race open (to clear up any rumours: I am 95% sure I will NOT, in fact, be running for the leadership).

This blog, of course, was born during the *last* PC leadership race, in which Ed Stelmach ascended to replace Ralph Klein with a second-ballot victory over runner-up Jim Dinning. As I did then, I shall endeavour to provide full and unbiased coverage of the candidates, their platforms, ideas, and campaigns. I have gone on the record stating that any candidate who wishes to author an article for this blog or who would submit to an interview would be provided this forum to get their message out, and (as always) I will not be endorsing anyone in this space - I imagine I'll develop a favourite, and will vote for that person, but this author respects his readers enough to let them make up their own minds.

In that vein, despite the fact that there is no PC leadership race as of this very moment, I've included below a handy list of links to information on the people who have stepped forward and declared their intentions to seek the PC leadership, when it becomes available:

In alphabetical order by surname, they are:

Doug Griffiths
Doug Horner
Gary Mar
Ted Morton
Alison Redford


I will also be covering the Alberta Party and Alberta Liberal leadership races as they develop. The open invitation for interviews or guest articles applies to candidates in those races as well.

It's an exciting time to be a political watcher in Alberta - and really, how long has it been since anyone could honestly say THAT?

- E.S.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

qOtd: Campaign Finance Reform

Nation, my apologies for the silence as late. To say that I've been going through some interesting times would be an understatement. What I want to talk about today is campaign finance reform.

One of the most convenient slurs to throw towards a candidate is the ever-popular "we don't know who's funding his campaign - he might be bought and paid for". While statutes regulate donations to political parties, they're all too lax when it comes to leadership campaigns, and to municipal elections.  For examples of this we need only look as far as the Wildrose Alliance leadership race, whose eventual winner still hasn't released a list of donors citing their apparent "fear of retribution from the government". Several PC Leadership candidates, including Doug Griffiths and Alison Redford, have expressed their commitment to full pre-emptive disclosure of donors to their campaigns, and amounts. The PC Party itself, through President Bill Smith, has been most emphatic that formal disclosure rules for all leadership candidates WILL be in effect, contrary to past practice (although Ed Stelmach DID eventually release the donor list for his successful PC Leadership run in 2006).

We saw a bit of this flavour creep into the Calgary Municipal campaign last October as well. Naheed Nenshi released a list of his donors, putting them into broad categories much like the back of a concert programme thanking "classes" of donors - "These people donated between $1,000 and $2,499". The advantage this has is that it provides partial disclosure - it says WHO is funding you - without requiring you to be so specific as to advertise to your opponents exactly how much money you've got in the War Chest. Kent Hehr, by comparison, released a full disclosure of his donors, before eventually pulling out of the race (Hehr, incidentally, has apparently REFUNDED his donors, on account of him not finishing the race. Now THAT is worth respect from across the entire spectrum).

The question is, do we need provincial statutes governing political party leadership races? And if so, what should they look like?

MY TAKE:

Yes, we do.

Political parties aren't like your local Elks Lodge or the Legion. The person who wins that election could conceivably find themselves, as result of our sometimes-arcane Westminster political system, in charge of the entire apparatus of government. Tens of Billions of dollars get spent every year by the provincial government, on the direct say-so of someone who was elected to lead one of those poorly-regulated political parties.

As it stands now, we count on the parties themselves to run these elections fairly. We're counting on it, but we have no way to hold them to account. For all we know, the leader of the Alberta Party is going to be declared after a cage fight (in which case my money's on Tesarski).

Just kidding, Alberta Party. I know better. But if you DID choose your leader that way, Albertans wouldn't be able to do anything about it.

Likewise the donation disclosure. Moreso than fisticuffs and way-too-tight Tap Out shirts, what successful political operations have in common is money. That money comes from average citizens, and it comes from businesses large and small. Some of those businesses and individuals, hard as it may be to believe, aren't donating out of the goodness of their hearts, but rather because they want to curry favour with a candidate they feel could someday be in a position to return the favour.

And we have EVERY right to know who our wannabe leaders are owing favours to, BEFORE we cast our ballots.

We don't regulate the leadership selection for the local chapter of the Rotary Club.

Then again, the Rotarians don't get to spend my tax dollars.

Let's fix this. Make it one of the first bills passed under the new Premier's administration. And commit to passing new, more stringent rules in time for the next municipal campaigns.

That's MY take...  what's yours?

Sunday, March 6, 2011

The Wildrose Alternative Budget: Fun With Numbers

Nation, after the release of the Government of Alberta's 2011-2012 Provincial Budget (and the all-day media feeding frenzy that followed), the "next Premier of Alberta" (as introduced by Rob Anderson, AFTER Ed announced his impending retirement, which makes you wonder what Rob knows that we don't) Danielle Smith presented the Wildrose Alliance's "Alternative Budget 2011".

I try to look at these types of documents with as objective an eye as I can - numbers in the millions and billions tend to make my head hurt, as they're so completely unrelatable to my every day life (more on that in an upcoming blog post).

That said, however, after reading the entire document, one phrase kept asserting itself over and over in my mind...  "ARE YOU FREAKING KIDDING ME?!?!"

Okay...  now that I've got that out of the way, let's take a look at the Wildrose Alternative Budget (full document available here).

Increasing spending on health care, education, children’s services, public safety, and seniors and social supports by the rate of inflation plus population growth (which was approximately 2.2% in 2010).

Alright...  now, I've gone on the record time and again as being in favour of spending restraint. We shouldn't waste money. Seriously. If I do it at home, my wife throws things at me. And that's if I waste my OWN money. Government doesn't HAVE its own money - the money that government spends is OUR money - yours and mine. We worked for it. We earned it. And they took it. Or it's a royalty on a resource that we own. But the money's ours, and government shouldn't waste it.

BUT...  the Wildrose often likes to echo the mantra from the Ralph Klein days (which makes sense, as they're adding notable Klein-era Tories all the time, much to the chagrin of some of their original membership) that "government should be run the same way you run your household".  They even refer to that idea a little later in their budget alternative.  So let's play a little game I like to call "inflation plus population growth".

Last year, your household budget for maintenance was $200. You spent $175, because you're awesome. This year, you had no new children, and inflation was - oh, let's say 1%. So, if you use the Wildrose Spending Restraint Rule, you can budget $202 for maintenance. Which you should be able to swing - after all, you're awesome.

[bang]

That sound you just heard downstairs was your water heater blowing up. A new one costs about $500, uninstalled.

Not a giant deal, you say.  This is an unusual situation, I can whip out the credit card to deal with this...  Oh, no you can't. You can't do that, because we govern our home under the Wildrose Spending Restraint Rule. Turn on the stove and start filling the bathtub with hot water from the pots on the stovetop, because we don't run deficits in THIS home.

The Wildrose points out - in their budget document - that a private member's bill brought forward from their caucus last year would have codified the Wildrose Spending Restraint Rule as law, and it was defeated. It was defeated, of course, because it's a stupid thing to have codified under law. About as stupid as a law outlawing deficit spending. Sometimes, bad things happen. Sometimes, you need to spend money to fix them when those bad things happen. And forcing politicians to "break the law" when those bad things DO happen is wasting our legislators' time in order to score cheap political points and satisfy the egos of the bill's author and sponsors.

Repeatedly throughout the document, the Wildrose Alliance makes reference to what they call horrible over-spending from the PC's "over the last decade". Half of that decade saw their hero Ralph Klein as Premier and half of their current caucus as Cabinet Members, although they go to great pains not to mention those facts. And another of those years saw the budget overseen and presented by one of their newest publicly-lauded party members, Dr. Lyle Oberg, who was Minister of Finance in 2006-07. So, which is it, Wildrose? Did Ralph and Lyle suck, or were they awesome? You can't have it both ways...


There are also communities in the province that need new schools and health facilities immediately. Only the most urgent of these should be undertaken this next year with a commitment to refrain from opening any new facilities without the budget to fully staff them.

An excellent idea. Take the new South Calgary Health Campus, for example: They shouldn't start accepting emergency cases there until all 293 beds at the new hospital are fully staffed. I don't care if you're bleeding from your carotid artery, get to the Rockyview Hospital - tell them Danielle sent you.

This year, the Wildrose Balanced Budget Alternative proposes to increase overall departmental spending for the Departments of Health, Education, Solicitor General, Seniors and Community Supports, and Children and Youth Services to the rate of inflation and population growth, which in 2010 was approximately 2.2% (*Stats Canada and Alberta Finance). All other departmental budgets will be kept relatively unchanged or decreased where recommended by the PCs in Budget 2011.

Okay. I'm not going to go into the "Which hospitals won't you open? Which schools will you close?" line of questioning, because it's already been done. We've got new health centres opening, and they need staff - which costs money. We've got teachers getting a contracted 5% raise - if their district budget increases by 2.2%, the extra money's going to come from...? (DON'T say "selling the CBE's new headquarters" - it'll just make Josh Traptow's head explode when he reads it).

What I AM going to take umbrage with here is the statement "All other departmental budgets will be kept relatively unchanged or decreased where recommended by the PCs in Budget 2011".

Really?

We can't trust the PC's to run a lemonade stand...  there's nothing even remotely conservative about them...  they're in need of a "3-step program" to deal with their "spending addiction"...  and yet, where they suggested spending reductions, you're just saying "okay, we're good with that"?

Folks, this is political laziness at its worst. And it's dangerous.

The Provincial Budget was written with hundreds of staff and full access to government financial details, over months of working meetings, deliberations, internal audits, and polishing. They had access to the full weight of the public service in writing it - because it's not the PC Budget for Alberta, it's the Government Budget for Alberta. Wildrose has to use their own people, and their own resources. The entire document is a massive undertaking. No one expects the Wildrose to be able to produce a mirror to that document, taking apart every ministry and department budget expense line-by-line.  But if you're the party that likes to think of itself as the next government - if your members introduce your leader as "the next Premier of Alberta" - you've simply GOT to do better than an 18-page rebuttal document that includes a title page and 8 charts that take up at least half-a-page each. That's 13 pages worth of text. This might be the last Budget to come out before the next General Election. You're proposing we hand you the keys to a nearly $40 Billion economy and our entire social infrastructure, based on 13 pages of text.

The Wildrose Alternative Budget was released the day after the Government presented the actual Budget document. One day after. The sober, reasoned construction of a mature and well-constructed rebuttal to 500 pages of detailed financial information and fiscal policy was released after less than 24 hours. I don't know if you can write a budget rebuttal hopped up on Red Bull or not, but the only other alternative I can see is that the rebuttal was written before the authors saw the original budget, and they just filled in some blanks. But the meat-and-potatoes of that 13 page rebuttal was written before they saw the budget. Which reeks of "politics as usual" - "I haven't read it, but I oppose it". THERE'S the refreshing change Albertans are looking for.

I get it. I really do. In the age of retail politics and Twitter, you've got to get your rebuttal out as soon as possible, while people are still talking about the Budget. Three hours from now Charlie Sheen's going to do another interview, and you'll lose your casual audience. But doing it FAST shouldn't be the focus of a party that wants to form government. Being thoughtful and thorough should be their focus. If you want to win the hearts and minds of Albertans, start by giving them what they deserve. Take a week, and do it right. Albertans don't deserve slick retail politics. That assumes they're fickle and simple-minded. Albertans deserve thoughtful and deliberate planning. They're smart enough to read a document without the pretty coloured charts (that indicate Wildrose proposals in blue and PC Government actions in red or pink - nice touch!), and they're serious enough about their government to read something at least as thick as the local paper. Albertans are smarter than you give them credit for. They don't just want it fast - this isn't drive-thru governance. They want - and deserve - for it to be done RIGHT.


Now, none of this is to say that the document is completely devoid of any redeeming qualities: The title page is nice, and the graphs are appealing (though VERY poorly labelled). And there are even a few good ideas in it, like shrinking the size of cabinet. I think we need a strong public service, but that doesn't mean we need 23, 25, or 29 ministers overseeing it.  And as I said, I favour the principle of eliminating waste, and spending only what MUST be spent, and saving the rest for a rainy day.  I get that from my parents, who in turn were raised by people who grew up in the Great Depression.

But this document reads, to me, like a badly constructed joke more than a serious proposal from a party that hopes to form government.

I'm not going to tell you what you should think - read the document for yourself. Come to your own conclusions.

But I *am* telling you what *I* think.

I think... "Are you freaking KIDDING me?"

Friday, March 4, 2011

Tory Leadership Contender Doug Griffiths on the Budget

Nation, it's no secret that I have a lot of love for politicians who blog (now, if only I could think of some bloggers who want to do politics...  oh well...).  I twumbled across a response to the recent provincial budget that was posted by PC Leadership Contender and Justin Timberlake lookalike Doug Griffiths on his campaign website.

Griffiths' remarks, available here, are notable for a few reasons - not the least of which is their tone. While defending the principle behind government spending on infrastructure during lean times when costs are lower (even at the risk of running a temporary capital deficit), Griffiths also warns against operating deficits, and manages to take his own party to task - again and again, in fact - for the lack of a long-term fiscal framework: a guiding document to get us from where we are to where we want to be in 10, 20 or 50 years.

Griffiths, along with Alison Redford, Doug Horner and Ted Morton, might be the next Premier of the Province of Alberta - so if you pay taxes here, it's worth checking out his thoughts.  In the next few days, I'll be reviewing the "un-race for the Premier's Office" thus far.




It's important to note that this blog will - as most of you long-time readers will have guessed by now - not be endorsing or "cheerleading" for any particular candidate during the PC Leadership race. It's my intention to try to offer as objective a viewpoint as possible, so PC Party members and regular Albertans can get a feel for the people running to replace the outgoing PC Leader and Premier. It's why this blog was started in the first place, during the PC Leadership race of 2006.

I should note that I also had a chance the day after Griffiths' leadership announcement to sit down and interview him at what his team was calling a "Blogger Breakfast". Video was taken, but I haven't yet posted it as I'm trying to adjust the brightness setting (shoddy camera work by yours truly). I would be absolutely delighted to offer the same opportunity to any PC Leadership candidate, as well as to any candidate for the open Alberta Liberal and Alberta Party leadership contests.

Thursday, March 3, 2011

qOtd: Private Health Delivery

qOtd: Should Alberta further explore the option of allowing private, for-profit delivery of health services?

Nation, it's no secret that our current healthcare system in this province is seriously over-taxed. We have too many people, making too many visits, to too few doctors and too few facilities. Once they get there, they have too few beds and too many patients to deal with. Wait times are improving, but still an issue of major concern. Throwing more money at the system doesn't seem to be helping, and isn't fiscally sustainable even if it WAS helping.

One proposed solution that keeps coming up is to allow private, for-profit delivery. In essence, allow "Enlightened Savage Health Services" to open its doors and perform neuro-surgical procedures, as an example (I'd recommend against it, as I had to check the spelling of "neuro"). Alberta Health would then cut a cheque to the clinic, rather than to itself.

The benefits, we're told, are that it would provide more options for care. More beds. More surgical bays. More facilities, closer to more Albertans. The risks, critics claim, is that it will take the most qualified doctors and nurses out of the clinics and hospitals we have, and put them in the for-profit clinics where they can afford to pay more, or offer better perks. Also, we're reminded, it doesn't address the issue of a lack of trained health personnel - we'll just be spreading a limited number of doctors and nurses even further.

MY TAKE:

I think we're foolish if we don't at least explore this option. If we have more facilities offering care, then the demand for trained health professionals will rise. When demand rises, the supply will increase to meet it (in theory). More students will pursue nursing or medicine, because they'll know there will be jobs. If they're exceptionally good, there will also be opportunities in the "for profit" health system.

There IS, of course, the "slippery slope" argument to be made: That once we allow this to take root, before too long we'll have a second tier of health care, available only to the super-rich.

I'd point out that we already HAVE a second tier of health care, hidden in plain sight. We see the results of that second tier every Saturday night.  When Jarome Iginla loses an edge and twists his knee on Monday, he's getting an MRI on Tuesday, and (if necessary) surgery by Friday. If the same thing happened to you or me on Monday, I'd get an MRI by Labour Day, and surgery by this time next year (maybe).  
Would these "for-profit" clinics allow for queue jumping? I suppose it's possible - it would depend on the legislation and the regulations. Even if it DID, though, consider: If I'm #3 on the list for a hip replacement, and Brett Wilson (who is #2) pays an extra $50,000 to get his done right now at the "Golden Hips OsteoSurgical Spa" in Nanton, then I - the poor plebe that I am - move to #2 on the list. And I'm getting mine sooner. Provided there are doctors to do it, and they aren't all working on Brett's hip because Golden Hips pays better than the Rockyview General Hospital.

I don't know if private, for-profit delivery can work for health services. I know that's how we get dental, vision and chiropractic care in this province - some dental clinics are better than others, and the rates we pay vary from chiropractor to chiropractor. If we're told that it can't work, then fine - it can't. This isn't something I want to explore due to ideological dogma. I'm not interested in this idea at ALL if it means anyone, anywhere, is waiting LONGER tomorrow than they are today. Or receiving worse care tomorrow than they are today.

But we owe it to our parents - and to ourselves, and our kids - to at least TALK about it. Because nobody gets hurt by TALKING about it, right?

That's MY take...  what's yours?