# Alberta Election (2015)



## Edward Campbell (8 Mar 2015)

Prof Tom Flanagan, who is well versed in Alberta politics, suggests, in this article, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_, that Alberta Premier Jim Prentice is engineering _"a most Canadian coup"_ by turning his recent _austerity_ remarks into a programme for which, he will the LG, he needs a new mandate:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/premier-prentice-is-pulling-off-a-most-canadian-coup/article23349814/


> Premier Prentice is pulling off a most Canadian coup
> 
> TOM FLANAGAN
> Special to The Globe and Mail
> ...




What do Albertans think?


----------



## Kat Stevens (8 Mar 2015)

This Albertan thinks that the premier blaming the average working class dudes in Barrhead, Ft Mac, or Medicine Hat for the shit state he and his govt have made of a once robust economy, is the equivalent of a career suicide note.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 Mar 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> This Albertan thinks that the premier blaming the average working class dudes in Barrhead, Ft Mac, or Medicine Hat for the shit state he and his govt have made of a once robust economy, is the equivalent of a career suicide note.



I think it's not so much blaming anyone, as much of the fact that Alberta's sole source industry (oil) has taken a tremendous hit and has pulled down the provincial revenues. All eggs in one basket thing. It was big oil that shuttered the doors and windows and went into hibernation, not something the government did. Eventually, things will get back to normal, hopefully. Almost everything in the province centred around oil.

Hopefully, along with austerity, people, and the government, will look to diversifying and decide to stick with it after the oil industry gets back on it's feet.

I also think this may be a good time for the Feds and provincial gov't to concentrate heavily on the push to fire up the east-west pipeline. It'll keep paying a lot of people a half decent wage and get the oil moving to both coasts. Start selling to the Asia and Europe and get off the US tit.


----------



## Kat Stevens (8 Mar 2015)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I think it's not so much blaming anyone, as much of the fact that Alberta's sole source industry (oil) has taken a tremendous hit and has pulled down the provincial revenues. All eggs in one basket thing. It was big oil that shuttered the doors and windows and went into hibernation, not something the government did. Eventually, things will get back to normal, hopefully. Almost everything in the province centred around oil.
> 
> Hopefully, along with austerity, people, and the government, will look to diversifying and decide to stick with it after the oil industry gets back on it's feet.
> 
> I also think this may be a good time for the Feds and provincial gov't to concentrate heavily on the push to fire up the east-west pipeline. It'll keep paying a lot of people a half decent wage and get the oil moving to both coasts. Start selling to the Asia and Europe and get off the US tit.



The premier of Alberta stated publicly that if people wanted to blame someone for the current situation, they should take a look in the mirror, not blame his government. The environmental whackjobs will never allow more pipelines, after all transporting crude oil by rail is much safer, especially in Northern Ontario.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (9 Mar 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> The premier of Alberta stated publicly that if people wanted to blame someone for the current situation, they should take a look in the mirror, not blame his government. The environmental whackjobs will never allow more pipelines, after all transporting crude oil by rail is much safer, especially in Northern Ontario.



Kat,

I'm not from there so I don't really have a dog in the fight. Just saying that's pretty broad statement and there's no end to the ways it could be interpreted. 

Also, can someone really blame a government that's only held office since Sept 2014? They have been in power a week short of 6 months. Most of them are probably still trying to find their offices. I fail to see how the actions of the ME and the USA, creating oil problems in AB, are the fault of Mr Prentice and his government.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Mar 2015)

The only real solution for Alberta is to introduce the PST.

Unfortunately, in Alberta, PST stands for 'Political Suicide Tax'.


----------



## a_majoor (9 Mar 2015)

Why is it the only "solution" for a _spending_ problem that does not get savaged is to raise taxes?

And, yes, Albertans should take a look in the mirror. Who, after all, sat back and elected Ed Stelmach and Alison Redford, who spent like crazy (essentially enacting a Liberal economic platform) and more importantly, undid the balanced budget legislation and siphoned off the monies from the Heritage Trust Fund (and not, may I add, for the benefit of the average rural or small town Albertans either)?

A 5% spending cut is a pittance, and could be done relatively simply (I'm sure there are more than a few redundent or overlapping programs that could be trimmed, and some of the wage issues plaguing the Alberta Public service should be resolved if the Government allows the Public service to decline due to attrittion and a hiring freeze. In Ontario, the PS could have been trimmed by 10,000 in just two years by attrition, so you have an idea of the magnitude of the changes that could be made). 

Look at Ontario. We needed to impose a _17%_ spending cut years ago just to stabilize the economy. Since our government ignored the findings of their own panel, and continued to raise spending and taxes, we have gone from bad to worse, and we can't even point at the collapse of resource industries since Ontario has a much more diversified economy.


----------



## Edward Campbell (9 Mar 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Why is it the only "solution" for a _spending_ problem that does not get savaged is to raise taxes?
> 
> And, yes, Albertans should take a look in the mirror. Who, after all, sat back and elected Ed Stelmach and Alison Redford, who spent like crazy (essentially enacting a Liberal economic platform) and more importantly, undid the balanced budget legislation and siphoned off the monies from the Heritage Trust Fund (and not, may I add, for the benefit of the average rural or small town Albertans either)?
> 
> ...




And that _could_ for the base for a successful campaign:

     1. Remember the three envelopes joke? 

         
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




         It's time for the first envelope and for a hint at the contents of the second.'

     2. I cannot see a powerful opposition, even if one agrees that Premier Prentice's "look in the mirror" comments constitute a political gaffe.

     3. Look at this:

         
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



         This graph ranks and plots personal income tax revenues as a share of total government revenues for provincial and state governments in 2012.  They range from a high of 28.5 percent for Quebec to a low of zero for seven U.S. states –
          Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming.  Unlike the real GDP growth ranking, which saw Canadian provinces spread out from the highs to the lows, when it comes to reliance on personal income
          taxation, Canadian provinces are pretty much clustered in the top half.  Some American states also have high revenue shares from PIT such as Connecticut and Massachusetts.

         
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



         This graph ranks and plots real GDP growth rates in 2012 for these 60 jurisdictions.  Average real GDP growth across these 50 U.S. states in 2012 was 2.1 percent whereas it averaged only 0.8 percent across the ten Canadian provinces
          mainly because of Newfoundland. Removing Newfoundland would raise average real GDP growth to 1.4 percent.  Either way, average growth was higher across U.S. states than it was across Canadian provinces in 2012.
          When ranked together, the top three jurisdictions were all American – North Dakota, Texas and Oregon (with Alberta a close fourth) and the bottom three were all Canadian – Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Newfoundland. 

The simple fact is, as Thucydides says, increasing taxes is not the only way to improve growth and balance budgets. When overspending is the problem it is time to apply Denis Healey's First law of holes ...


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Mar 2015)

The problem is that we're greedy. We expect that Government will give us everything because it has lots of money. The painful truth that most people ignore is that while the government does in fact have lots of money, it has no money of its own. It has lots of other people's money, and if it continues to fund everything we want, it's going to need to depend on other people's money.

Margaret Thatcher famously said something about that...

Raise taxes, or stop spending. It really is that binary, and that simple.


----------



## observor 69 (9 Mar 2015)

And carrying on the same theme, from the G&M. Some room for taxes perhaps?

And what have Albertans supported? Successive PC governments with no sense of fiscal responsibility that lazily spent away the benefits of the province’s natural resources bounty. Leave aside the debate about whether Alberta has undertaxed oil companies, or should, as Alberta Federation of Labour head Gil McGowan argues, invest in refiners and upgraders. This is a province, as the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association noted in a 2013 brief, with “the lowest overall tax system in Canada, with the lowest fuel taxes, no sales tax, no health premiums, no capital or payroll taxes, and low personal and corporate income taxes. Albertans and Alberta businesses would pay at least $10.6-billion more in taxes each year if Alberta had the tax system of any other province.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/rob-insight/prentice-blames-albertans-for-their-woes-and-hes-right/article23333248/


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Mar 2015)

Baden Guy said:
			
		

> And carrying on the same theme, from the G&M. Some room for taxes perhaps?
> 
> And what have Albertans supported? Successive PC governments with no sense of fiscal responsibility that lazily spent away the benefits of the province’s natural resources bounty. Leave aside the debate about whether Alberta has undertaxed oil companies, or should, as Alberta Federation of Labour head Gil McGowan argues, invest in refiners and upgraders. This is a province, as the Alberta Urban Municipalities Association noted in a 2013 brief, with “the lowest overall tax system in Canada, with the lowest fuel taxes, no sales tax, no health premiums, no capital or payroll taxes, and low personal and corporate income taxes. Albertans and Alberta businesses would pay at least $10.6-billion more in taxes each year if Alberta had the tax system of any other province.”
> 
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/rob-insight/prentice-blames-albertans-for-their-woes-and-hes-right/article23333248/



It doesn't matter how you dress up taxes. In the end there is only once source of tax revenue; the individual. Raise corporate taxes and they'll pass them on to the consumer. Raise gas taxes, the consumer pays. Etc, etc, etc... ad infinitum.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (9 Mar 2015)

I'm sure Liberals and Commies are upset at Prentice for his absolutely correct observation that the reason we have fiscally irresponsible governments is that people vote for governments that give them goodies.  I don't think the people who would otherwise vote for Prentice are the least bit concerned.  It's like Barney Fife being outraged on a weekly basis for the last 10 years on CTV's Question Period by Conservatives for doing and saying what Conservatives do and say.


----------



## Edward Campbell (24 Mar 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> The problem is that we're greedy. We expect that Government will give us everything because it has lots of money. The painful truth that most people ignore is that while the government does in fact have lots of money, it has no money of its own. It has lots of other people's money, and if it continues to fund everything we want, it's going to need to depend on other people's money.
> 
> Margaret Thatcher famously said something about that...
> 
> Raise taxes, or stop spending. It really is that binary, and that simple.




And this chart shows the _real_ problem:






... too much (social) Spending!

The chart shows that Alberta has _outspent_ Texas by a full 10% in the past dozen years and that, since the _great recession_ began, it has, unlike Texas, _failed_ to balance its budget.  There's a reason of that failure ... two reasons actually:

     1. People want, indeed *demand* social services, and not all social spending is unproductive;* but

     2. Most governments, including the Government of Alberta from 2008 to 2013, lack the courage to manage spending.

_____
* A lot of social spending is or could be/should be _productive_ but politics and bureaucratic ineptitude get in the way. Consider public transit: it is a drain on most cities' and provinces' budgets, all over the world; *but* not in Hong Kong, nor in Japan where the public purse built the systems - because the capital costs are beyond even giant corporations - but they are run by _profitable_ private companies in which governments are, at best, minority shareholders. Are Asians smarter than us? No; but they have more sensible voters who understand that private management is, generally, much better (qualitatively and quantitatively) than public sector management.


----------



## Edward Campbell (29 Mar 2015)

Here is a bit of a surprise: "Danielle Smith had been one of the most effective opposition leaders Alberta had ever seen. Then last December she upended the province’s political establishment by leading the bulk of her Wildrose Party in a mass defection to the government ... On Saturday evening, Progressive-Conservative voters in the riding of Highwood rejected Ms. Smith’s bid to be their representative in the next election."

------------
Edited to add:

I suppose, but highly doubt, the Premier Prentice could _parachute_ her into another riding ... but I think doing that would violate what they both claim as _principles_.

High River is part of the Macleod federal riding, represented by John Barlow who, interestingly enough, lost the provincial riding to Danielle Smith in 2012. According to the CPC website* Mr Barlow has not, yet, been confirmed as the CPC candidate for the 2015 federal general election so there _might_ be an opportunity for Ms Smith to challenge him and move into federal politics ...

_____
* Use the drop down menu to select Alberta


----------



## daftandbarmy (29 Mar 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Here is a bit of a surprise: "Danielle Smith had been one of the most effective opposition leaders Alberta had ever seen. Then last December she upended the province’s political establishment by leading the bulk of her Wildrose Party in a mass defection to the government ... On Saturday evening, Progressive-Conservative voters in the riding of Highwood rejected Ms. Smith’s bid to be their representative in the next election."
> 
> ------------
> Edited to add:
> ...



And the Wild Rose gets another dose of pesticide...


----------



## Blackadder1916 (29 Mar 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> *Here is a bit of a surprise*: "Danielle Smith had been one of the most effective opposition leaders Alberta had ever seen. Then last December she upended the province’s political establishment by leading the bulk of her Wildrose Party in a mass defection to the government ... On Saturday evening, Progressive-Conservative voters in the riding of Highwood rejected Ms. Smith’s bid to be their representative in the next election."
> 
> ------------
> Edited to add:
> ...



Surprise? What surprise?  I think Ms. Smith made a tactical error in crossing the floor in the manner in which she did, and it will be some time before constituents forgive her or forget.  What will be significant is how her fellow floor-crossers fare in any up-coming nomination races or provincial election if they choose to run.  Not only do Albertans lean to conservativism fiscally, but there is a significant part of the population that are also social conservatives.  You would probably find many Wildrose supporters are counted in the latter.  As for a jump to federal politics, she will still face the same people who think she betrayed them.  John Barlow is not listed as the candidate for "Macleod" because that riding was redistributed in the last boundaries redistribution and the riding of "Foothills" was created - Barlow is listed as the candidate.


----------



## a_majoor (29 Mar 2015)

The big question: is there an effective opposition in Alberta at all?

With the self destruction of the Wildrose Alliance, and the essential irrelevance of the Liberals and NDP, there is really nothing to "keep the government honest", or even offer the challenge to force them to clean up their act. Watching the news today it was clear the Alberta government has no real desire to solve their _*spending problem*_; Premier Prentice seemed satisfied to be runnig a $5 billion deficit this year, and it wasn't clear that there was going to be a long term goal to balance the budget or eliminate the debt.

While Alberta isn't in the dire economic situation of Ontario or Quebec, another oil shock as Saudi Arabia turns the screws on the Iranians (syrians, Russians etc.) or an interest rate spike when someone, somewhere, defaults at last (Greece? Ukraine? Ontario? California?) will rapidly destabilize the Albertan economy. If they are carrying a debt and running a deficit, they will have far less room to maneuvere, and that will have pretty negative impacts on the rest of Canada as well (what happens when _everyone_ qualifies for equalization payments, or Alberta cannot deliver the money?)


----------



## daftandbarmy (30 Mar 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> The big question: is there an effective opposition in Alberta at all?
> 
> With the self destruction of the Wildrose Alliance, and the essential irrelevance of the Liberals and NDP, there is really nothing to "keep the government honest", or even offer the challenge to force them to clean up their act. Watching the news today it was clear the Alberta government has no real desire to solve their _*spending problem*_; Premier Prentice seemed satisfied to be runnig a $5 billion deficit this year, and it wasn't clear that there was going to be a long term goal to balance the budget or eliminate the debt.
> 
> While Alberta isn't in the dire economic situation of Ontario or Quebec, another oil shock as Saudi Arabia turns the screws on the Iranians (syrians, Russians etc.) or an interest rate spike when someone, somewhere, defaults at last (Greece? Ukraine? Ontario? California?) will rapidly destabilize the Albertan economy. If they are carrying a debt and running a deficit, they will have far less room to maneuvere, and that will have pretty negative impacts on the rest of Canada as well (what happens when _everyone_ qualifies for equalization payments, or Alberta cannot deliver the money?)



Alberta has been a single party state longer than Zimbabwe. It kind of shows too, unfortunately.


----------



## larry Strong (7 Apr 2015)

And we are off and running.....

Alberta Premier Jim Prentice has called a provincial election for May 5.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/albertans-will-head-to-the-polls-on-may-5-1.2314906


Cheers
Larry


----------



## Rocky Mountains (9 Apr 2015)

308.com
Wild Rose 30%    25 seats
PC          28%    35 seats
NDP        24%    17 seats
Lib          13%    10  seats
   
http://www.threehundredeight.com/p/canada.html

Mind you, Wild Rose led by 10% immediately before the last election and lost.  I don't think there will be any last minute second thoughts this time.

Latest - Mainstreet Technologies - likely to vote

Wild Rose 33%
PC          27%
NDP        25%

http://globalnews.ca/news/1929159/tight-three-way-election-race-in-alberta-new-poll-says/

Danielle Smith must be quickly coming to the realization that she was really dumb.  Brian Jean doesn't have Smith's personality but he still might win.  Being an MP for 10 years doesn't hurt his credibility.


----------



## daftandbarmy (9 Apr 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> 308.com
> Wild Rose 30%    25 seats
> PC          28%    35 seats
> NDP        24%    17 seats
> ...



Anyone want to bet that the NDP will win this time, despite themselves?


----------



## Edward Campbell (12 Apr 2015)

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_ is a look at the challenges facing Premier Jim Prentice and the contradictions he offers to Albertans:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/open-road-an-apt-metaphor-for-albertas-jim-prentice/article23887759/


> If Prentice wins majority, Alberta’s future will echo his contradictions
> 
> JUSTIN GIOVANNETTI
> The Globe and Mail
> ...




A few disjointed points:

     _"If he wins a majority on May 5, as is widely expected ..."_ ~ I wonder. My _sense_ is that polls, no mater how well designed, and _expert opinion_ in the media are no longer very good guides to voter
      intentions. For whatever reasons we, the people, seem inclined to both tell the pollsters something less than the truth and make up our minds when we arrive at the polling station.

      Alberta has to develop and exploit its _other_ great natural resource: an educated, sophisticated population. Oil is a wonderful foundation, and oil prices will rebound (I'm about 99.9% sure that the Saudis, especially, cannot keep prices
      depressed for too long ~ their own budget is in shambles), but Alberta needs to build on that foundation, not squander it on social spending.

      Jim Prentice is a proven, established leader. Brian Jean is less experienced, he has less _gravitas_, but he's younger and more charismatic, _I think_.

Your views, pleases, Albertans.

_____
Mods: Can someone remove the "?" from the title, please?


----------



## ModlrMike (12 Apr 2015)

Living in Alberta during the Klein years, I recall that there was a view to diversify the economy. Successive governments never really go on board with that idea. The lure of easy money perhaps. I hope that whoever sits in the Premier's chair turns casts a critical eye to insulating Alberta from the boom and bust cycles that it is now subject to.


----------



## Tibbson (12 Apr 2015)

The biggest issue I had with living in Alberta was that everyone else assumed we were better off because there was no provincial sales tax.  Sure, when I made a purchase I didn't have the extra tacked on but at the same time because there was no provincial sales tax money for provincial programs or to trickle down to lower levels of government I found that everything was more expensive.  

- Need to send your kids to school on a school bus....$160 a month for all school systems in Edmonton ($80 if your kid was in the public system but $0 if your kid was in the catholic school system).

- I would get repeated calls every August hassling me about the annual tag renewals for my dog and cats.  One year I told the woman that I was well aware they were coming due and I'll pay them as soon as I get the notice, to which she replied the notices were being sent out in the next week and if I didn't pay them on time there would be a fine levied.  

- I drove a brand new vehicle to the province when I was posted in.  Less then 2 weeks off the lot with valid emissions testing and safety check from Ontario but I was still required to pay a $120 Out of Province Vehicle inspection fee.  About 6 months later I bought an 11 year old beater to get back and forth to work but because I bought it in the province no inspection or anything was needed.  

- I have a relative living there now who is a new PhD professor but because the provincial government has frozen all money for post secondary education various university and college departments are being shut down and wages for professors are frozen.  Now many will say thats fine because university professors get paid too much as it but they would be wrong.  A new professor in Calgary makes about the same as a CAF Sgt but that doesn't factor in the professors cost of living in Calgary and any outstanding student loans.

Personally I think the province would be much better off with a small sales tax of some sort.


----------



## Kat Stevens (12 Apr 2015)

I moved to Alberta in 1996, mostly because the government decided that me and 400 close personal friends didn't like it in Chilliwack any more.  As soon as we crossed into Alberta, it was effectively a 5% pay raise due to the pst.  Gasoline and food staples were cheaper.  This was in an era where King Ralph was making cuts to health care, and let me tell you, I'd take a cut down Alberta health care system over what was going on in BC at the time.  There seemed to be a medi centre about every 8 blocks.  I have an autistic son, and the difference in supports for him between here and in BC was startling.  To the election, I live in a rural farming area that butts up against the oil patch.  I have never heard so much anti gov talk out here as I have in the last 6-12 months, and this is a VERY conservative area.  PC may very likely get back in, but not by a large majority is my feeling.


----------



## Kirkhill (12 Apr 2015)

Keep in mind that Wildrose was effectively the right wing of the PC party after the left wing of the PC party was hi-jacked by Alison Redford's teachers.

In some senses Danielle Smith achieved the goal of seeing off the Redford faction and leaving it open for Prentice to try and reunite the factions.

I expect Prentice to be in the mold of Peter Lougheed - a centrist/pragmatist who would normally (pre-Redford) have had a pretty easy ride.  

But the Laisser-Faire right wing (the Klein Faction) who have always been at odds with the more activist Lougheed Faction smelt red meat when the Wildrose was formed.  They sensed the opportunity for an ideologically pure government.  With Smith going over to Prentice - Opportunity Denied!  They are not going to forgive her or her associates anytime soon.

Lougheed and Klein both succeeded as Alberta politicians because they never got too far ahead of the crowd.  They stayed in contact and moved the crowd where and when the opportunity presented itself.

Stelmach and Redford didn't Grok* that.  The jury is out on Prentice.

*Grok - Stranger in a Strange Land, Robert Heinlein, 1961.


----------



## Kat Stevens (12 Apr 2015)

What made Ralph so popular here, and such a joke in th rest of Canada, is that he wasn't afraid to walk onto a farm and get shit on his shoes, or sit in a hotel bar and slug down a Pil with the great unwashed.  The ROC likes it's politicians starched and pressed, but out here Ralph looked like one of us.  Nobody has been able to pull that off since, and as I said before, you could dig up his cold moldering corpse and he'd get a good share of the vote.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (12 Apr 2015)

Schindler's Lift said:
			
		

> Personally I think the province would be much better off with a small sales tax of some sort.



Compared to every other province, Alberta has an embarrassment of revenue.  More and they would piddle it away and borrow some more.  Despite the incessant whining, Alberta has an amazing healthcare system.  The largest problem in Alberta is that doctors, nurses, teachers, etc. are paid 20 % more than the Canadian average.  All the leaders since Ralph were too busy buying off the unions to properly manage the economy.  Looks like a 3 way race with the NDP in Edmonton, the PCs in Calgary, and Wild Rose in most of the rest.


----------



## Edward Campbell (12 Apr 2015)

Malcolm Mayes (_Edomonton Journal_) opines:





Source: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CCbM8SfW8AAaiYH.png:large


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (13 Apr 2015)

I have no doubt you can use this cartoon and substitute the faces by those of the last six Premiers of any province, or of the last six Prime Ministers, and it will still work.


----------



## Edward Campbell (13 Apr 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I have no doubt you can use this cartoon and substitute the faces by those of the last six Premiers of any province, or of the last six Prime Ministers, and it will still work.




 :bravo:

Very true ... we, all of us, are swamped by platitudes when what we really _*need*_ is sound, even if unpopular, _*leadership*_.


----------



## Edward Campbell (17 Apr 2015)

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Coopyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_ is an interesting report:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/alberta/alberta-election-polls-painting-a-bleak-picture-for-prentices-tories/article23999141/
My _emphasis_ added


> Alberta election polls painting a bleak picture for Prentice’s Tories
> 
> ALLAN MAKI AND JUSTIN GIOVANNETTI
> CALGARY and EDMONTON — The Globe and Mail
> ...




So are angry voters sending a warning to the Tories via the polls or is the dynasty dead?


----------



## Kirkhill (17 Apr 2015)

1848 ERC - same problem in Britain and Europe.

Something is happening but all we can do just now is wait and see.  There are way too many moving pieces just now.  I wouldn't even begin to hazard a guess on any election just now.


----------



## a_majoor (17 Apr 2015)

Serious question, though. Are the Wildrose or NDP even remotely ready to run a government?


----------



## Rocky Mountains (17 Apr 2015)

The dynasty is dead.  It is interesting that close to 100 % of rural constituencies will vote Wildrose.  The Conservatives lost touch with the third of the province that was their core support that despite the ups and downs could be relied upon to always be there.  Without going into specifics but the lies and broken promises simply piled up.  As soon as the election was called the promises for schools, roads and hospitals we have been hearing every election for 25 years started hitting the local papers.  Too late.  Can't trust them.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (17 Apr 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Serious question, though. Are the Wildrose or NDP even remotely ready to run a government?



You ask that question as if you actually believe that the politicians run the government.  The bureaucrats run the government and for the most part tell the politicians what to do.  Brian Jean has been an MP for 10 years and a businessman and lawyer.  Sure he's ready.  Rachel Notley has been a union organizer and a lawyer.  UUuugghhHH!


----------



## Zartan (18 Apr 2015)

Something very interesting has been going on in Alberta of late. For the past several months, the political reportage here has risen from the depths of mediocrity and has, for the first time in my life, actually held the government to account.* Klein and even Stelmach could have gotten away with Prentice's mistakes, and indeed did, and Prentice seems to think he can; however, there must be some degree of believing one's own BS going on in the PC camp. Literally no one, listening to the radio, reading papers, or listening to people for the past few months would have still thought this coming election a PC repeat (and if this is true in Calgary, you can only imagine in rural Alberta and Edmonton). The massive levels of disapproval attached to his name are perhaps the best indication of what Albertans feel, and he's done nothing so far to improve upon it. The PCs look like they've marched into a trap, and they may not get out of it.

*The Sun papers in 2012 did a reasonable job, but considering their closeness with Mrs. Smith, it's more suspicious than it is professional.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (21 Apr 2015)

Wildrose 35.1 % - close to majority.  Estimated 41 of 44 required seats.

http://www.threehundredeight.com/2015/04/wildrose-moves-ahead-in-new-poll.html?spref=tw

This time Wildrose might be the safe vote for non-communists.  NDP strength is concentrated in Edmonton where they will win almost all the seats but virtually none elsewhere.


----------



## Infanteer (21 Apr 2015)

Wouldn't that be icing for Danielle Smith - she leaves the Wildrose and is summarily booted from the PCs, only to have the Wildrose appear ready to form a government....


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Apr 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> Wildrose 35.1 % - close to majority.  Estimated 41 of 44 required seats.
> 
> http://www.threehundredeight.com/2015/04/wildrose-moves-ahead-in-new-poll.html?spref=tw
> 
> This time Wildrose might be the safe vote for non-communists.  NDP strength is concentrated in Edmonton where they will win almost all the seats but virtually none elsewhere.



That's funny. The website says the Alberta NDP  (not the wild rose party) have 35.1 percent and are on track to win the election.

There is every chance the PCs and Wildrose could split the vote and  actually let the NDP come up middle. Interesting times.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (25 Apr 2015)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> That's funny. The website says the Alberta NDP  (not the wild rose party) have 35.1 percent and are on track to win the election.
> 
> There is every chance the PCs and Wildrose could split the vote and  actually let the NDP come up middle. Interesting times.



Wouldn't that be something - the NDP ruling in Alberta of all places.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Apr 2015)

Yep. About like the Conservatives suddenly winning in Quebec.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (25 Apr 2015)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> That's funny. The website says the Alberta NDP  (not the wild rose party) have 35.1 percent and are on track to win the election.
> 
> There is every chance the PCs and Wildrose could split the vote and  actually let the NDP come up middle. Interesting times.



One out of 3 recent polls has the NDP ahead at 38 %.  The rest have Wildrose ahead but reduced in strength.  The 38 % poll is sponsored the Edmonton Journal and in my mind they are the Edmonton version of the Red Star.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (30 Apr 2015)

Wow - 2 more polls confirmed the NDP lead.

http://www.threehundredeight.com/p/canada.html

The night of the election Prentice better talk to Jean and arrange a King/Byng where he stays in power despite losing the election.  All we need is cheap oil AND the Commies in power.  Maybe I'll move to Newfoundland.


----------



## larry Strong (30 Apr 2015)

But it does not factor in local candidates and Eric Grenier takes polling data from the whole province and then extrapolates. So if polls say outside of Edmonton and Calgary the NDP support has doubled in the last 3 years then it will take previous election data and double it... In the riding break down, the NDP lead is less convincing

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-LCRTo5GHefM/VUIzb4DYRfI/AAAAAAAAWC0/YwFbljJ4OPE/s1600/Riding%2BProjections.png

Cheers
Larry


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 May 2015)

David Akin posted the final polling results on his the internet:






_Source:_ https://www.facebook.com/davidakin/photos/a.217367354956282.69773.217317161627968/1135256629834012/?type=1&theater

We'll see the voters' poll results in a few hours.


----------



## jollyjacktar (5 May 2015)

My uncle was the incumbent Social Credit member for MacLeod in the election that swept them out of power and the Lougheed gang in.  I think that this will be Waterloo for the PC party.  I am surprised to see the NDP as a real and potential threat in the province as it's been such a long since something like the Social Credit was in vogue.  Tomorrow will be interesting to wake up to and see what's become of the place.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 May 2015)

From 2013:
From - ThreeHundredEight.com


> Wednesday, May 15, 2013
> 
> Polling industry dealt major blow in B.C. election
> 
> Last night was a very bad one for Adrian Dix and the New Democrats, who expected victory as much as the pollsters did. And with good reason: a stabilizing, maybe even growing, lead over the B.C. Liberals with hours to go before the polls opened. Instead, British Columbians collectively woke up and changed their minds and swung about 13 points towards Christy Clark. Or, more likely, something disastrously wrong occurred in the polling industry..............



Remainder at link - http://www.threehundredeight.com/2013/05/polling-industry-dealt-major-blow-in-bc.html

Personally, I'll wait till the actual election results are in to see who polls the highest


----------



## RedcapCrusader (5 May 2015)

Quick question:

Couldn't really find much while working today. I Have to cast my ballot during my transition between jobs, is there a CAF policy stating mbrs cannot report to their polling station and cast a ballot while in uniform? 

Thanks


----------



## Fishbone Jones (5 May 2015)

Don't worry about it. Go vote.


----------



## Edward Campbell (5 May 2015)

RedcapCrusader said:
			
		

> Quick question:
> 
> Couldn't really find much while working today. I Have to cast my ballot during my transition between jobs, is there a CAF policy stating mbrs cannot report to their polling station and cast a ballot while in uniform?
> 
> Thanks




Many, if not most of the votes I cast over the past 55 years were done while wearing my uniform. As recceguy says, don't sweat the small stuff, just go and vote!


----------



## RedcapCrusader (5 May 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Many, if not most of the votes I cast over the past 55 years were done while wearing my uniform. As recceguy says, don't sweat the small stuff, just go and vote!



Good to know. I just wasn't sure if it was going to be an issue, I had no other choice considering my time constraints.
Thank you, though.


----------



## The Bread Guy (6 May 2015)

The Canadian Press and other media are calling it *"NDP Majority"* (source of attached graphic here).

Welcome to "Repeat of Ontario 1990 West".  My fave joke from that time - How did Bob Rae pick his cabinet?  Asked his first caucus meeting as Premier, "everyone who owns a suit, stand up."


----------



## OldTanker (6 May 2015)

Guess the polls were right for a change.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (6 May 2015)

I have lived in an NDP Ontario, BC, and Manitoba.

Welcome to a world of pain, Alberta.


----------



## dapaterson (6 May 2015)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I have lived in an NDP Ontario, BC, and Manitoba.
> 
> Welcome to a world of pain, Alberta.



If oil recovers, they can be as fiscally irresponsible as the Alberta PC party was.


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 May 2015)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I have lived in an NDP Ontario, BC, and Manitoba.
> 
> Welcome to a world of pain, Alberta.



Amen.

You should get busy buying up commercial property out there by the airport in Sidney... I'm guessing that there will be a big influx of Corporate HQs in a few weeks.  ;D


----------



## SeaKingTacco (6 May 2015)

BC and Saskatchewan real estate are about to go on a tear...


----------



## ModlrMike (6 May 2015)

They've basically taken the cities. An important lesson for the National vote. According to CMHC data, roughly 78% of Canadians over 55 years of age live in urban centers.


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 May 2015)

Yup, and city folk votes are always worth twice what a country mouse's vote is worth.  We're boned.


----------



## dapaterson (6 May 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Yup, and city folk votes are always worth twice what a country mouse's vote is worth.  We're boned.



Actually, in Canada, most rural ridings have much fewer voters than urban ridings.  Voters in rural areas have disproportionate representation; if they didn't, supply management wouldn't exist.


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 May 2015)

My point is that the cities elect these assholes, and the rural folks get to wear the shit they excrete.  Look at the map, not many NDP seats outside the urban areas.  NDPrs don't typically relate too well to people who get up early in the morning and work all day long.


----------



## dapaterson (6 May 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> My point is that the cities elect these assholes, and the rural folks get to wear the shit they excrete.  Look at the map, not many NDP seats outside the urban areas.  NDPrs don't typically relate too well to people who get up early in the morning and work all day long.



I recently read a study on the city of Ottawa - the rural areas get about $3 of benefits for every $1 they pay in taxes.  If rural folks don't want to deal with decisions made by urban voters, start paying your fair share...


----------



## OldSolduer (6 May 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> They've basically taken the cities. An important lesson for the National vote. According to CMHC data, roughly 78% of Canadians over 55 years of age live in urban centers.



Don't be too surprised if the NDP in Manitoba come out with a minority government next year.


----------



## Alberta Bound (6 May 2015)

The only one to blame was the PCs. They went out of their way to offend regular people.  They could have succeeded. It was like they were so determined to prove they could do whatever and no one would dare to say no.  

Those that wanted something else had no choice. Unless you could stomach the Wildrose.      

We will see what the next 4 years will hold.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 May 2015)

Alberta Bound said:
			
		

> The only one to blame was the PCs. They went out of their way to offend regular people.  They could have succeeded. It was like they were so determined to prove they could do whatever and no one would dare to say no.
> 
> Those that wanted something else had no choice. Unless you could stomach the Wildrose.
> 
> We will see what the next 4 years will hold.




Agreed ... and I hear, on the radio, that Jim Prentice has resigned as PC leader and as a member of the legislature: presumably he'll return to Bay Street.

It will be interesting to see what kind of NDP they grow out in Alberta: is it the destructive, Canadian Labour Congress and academic led, child of David Lewis, Mel Watkins and Jim Laxer? Or is it the socially moderate and economically prudent child of the CCF and Tommy Douglas?


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 May 2015)

With luck it will be of the Social Credit bent as well.  They were of similar line to Tommy Douglas and the CCF.  Hopefully they're not going to be like the Dexter NDP we had here, they were such a disappointment and disaster.


----------



## Inspir (6 May 2015)

Good on Alberta. After 44 years it was time for a change. NDP is one heck of a change however. Total shift in the political spectrum. Would have personally leaned more to the Wildrose Party. Will be interesting.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 May 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> David Akin posted the final polling results on his the internet:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



According to the _Globe and Mail_'s front page banner the results were:

PC: 27.8%   Wildrose: 24.2%   Liberals: 4.2%    NDP: 40.6%   Others: 3.2%


----------



## ModlrMike (6 May 2015)

Interesting to note too that Alberta tends to hang on to their governing parties for quite long stretches. No defeated party has later formed the government.

Source


----------



## Retired AF Guy (6 May 2015)

May we live in interesting times.


----------



## Remius (6 May 2015)

This is the sort of result I was wishing for in the last Ontario election.  The liberals here needed to be punished by the electorate the same way Albertans punished the PCs there.  I guess Ontarians still like the Kool-Aid they've been drinking for the last little while.


----------



## George Wallace (6 May 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Interesting to note too that Alberta tends to hang on to their governing parties for quite long stretches. No defeated party has later formed the government.
> 
> Source



I would think that this is more of a "Protest Vote" than anything else; a cleaning of the house.  I don't think the NDP will last much longer than one term.  Don't forget, that Albertans can look to Saskatchewan and Manitoba for historical references as to how the NDP have done.


----------



## George Wallace (6 May 2015)

Crantor said:
			
		

> This is the sort of result I was wishing for in the last Ontario election.  The liberals here needed to be punished by the electorate the same way Albertans punished the PCs there.  I guess Ontarians still like the Kool-Aid they've been drinking for the last little while.



The Teachers Union may be the first to be weened of the Wynne Government Kool-Aid.   ;D


----------



## Alberta Bound (6 May 2015)

Many people I know (personal non scientific poll) hoped for a minority NDP govt. Something for a change but without the mandate to go crazy. Integrity was a huge issue and many just felt Prentice doesn't have it.


----------



## dapaterson (6 May 2015)

Alberta Bound said:
			
		

> Many people I know (personal non scientific poll) hoped for a minority NDP govt. Something for a change but without the mandate to go crazy. Integrity was a huge issue and many just felt Prentice doesn't have it.



As demonstrated by his petulant "I quit.  Pay for an immediate by-election in my riding, because I'm leaving and going home."


----------



## Old Sweat (6 May 2015)

Remember when he was being touted as a replacement for Stephen Harper as he was moderate, intelligent, likeable, pick anymore adjectives you want. 

It may well be that while he was attractive and extremely competent as a subordinate in the Federal cabinet, he buckled under the pressure of command.


----------



## dapaterson (6 May 2015)

Most interesting riding of the night has to go to Calgary-Glenmore where, after the ballots were counted:  It's a tie between the Conservatives and the NDP (7015 votes each).  Recount today, and probably a judicial recount after that...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/elections/alberta-votes/divisions/calgary-glenmore-1.3009757


----------



## observor 69 (6 May 2015)

Stephen Lautens on Twitter  

Haven't heard form my Alberta Conservative trolls this morning. 
They must be out back digging up the emergency canned goods & ammo. #cdnpoli


----------



## Kirkhill (6 May 2015)

40% can keep the NDP in power for a good long time.  

If they are smart enough to not got batshitcrazy with their policies.

And if the PCs and Wildrose want to nurse their grudges and not do a complete reorg under a completely new banner - as with the Saskatchewan Party. 

In other news - the sun came up in the east this morning.

And last night was the Full Moon.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 May 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> As demonstrated by his petulant "I quit.  Pay for an immediate by-election in my riding, because I'm leaving and going home."




I expected nothing different ... Jim Prentice was running to remain premier of Alberta, not for any other job, certainly not to sit of the far, far back benches with the third party.

He is a very able man, but his _political judgement_ and his ability to pick advisors are now suspect and he is, I hope, out of politics forever ... he and Danielle Smith?

He'll be welcomed back on Bay Street.


----------



## Kirkhill (6 May 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> ....He'll be welcomed back on Bay Street.



Just as Ignatieff was welcomed back to Harvard.

In both instances the electorate saw the candidate for what he was and not what he wanted to be seen as.

Somebody brought up the CCF, out here it was the United Farmers of Alberta (1921 - 1935).  They were replaced by the Social Credit.

Both of them ran against Bay Street Bankers....

And one of Calgary`s boasts has been how much capital it has moved from Bay Street to be controlled in Calgary.

And now, here come the socialist hordes from Edmonton ready to carve up that pie.


----------



## dapaterson (6 May 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I expected nothing different ... Jim Prentice was running to remain premier of Alberta, not for any other job, certainly not to sit of the far, far back benches with the third party.
> 
> He is a very able man, but his _political judgement_ and his ability to pick advisors are now suspect and he is, I hope, out of politics forever ... he and Danielle Smith?
> 
> He'll be welcomed back on Bay Street.



He received his coronation as head of the party, but then the proles revolted. Resigning his seat immediately speaks poorly of his vision of serving the public - "Either I'm in charge or I'm taking by ball and going home".

Maybe he could be convinced to pay the Alberta taxpayers for the cost of the needless byelection?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 May 2015)

Oh look! Hell has finally frozen over! ;D


----------



## Blackadder1916 (6 May 2015)

http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/voter-turnout-the-strongest-in-decades-in-alberta-1.2361119


> Voter turnout the strongest in decades in Alberta
> 
> Michael Franklin, CTV Calgary
> Published Wednesday, May 6, 2015 5:14AM MDT
> ...



This is interesting to note.  There was early speculation that a lower voter turn-out trend would continue which would have favoured the incumbents.


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 May 2015)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> I recently read a study on the city of Ottawa - the rural areas get about $3 of benefits for every $1 they pay in taxes.  If rural folks don't want to deal with decisions made by urban voters, start paying your fair share...



I read a study once that said that The Holocaust never happened, and if it did, they had it coming.  This is Alberta, Not Ontario that relies on industry in populated areas for it's tax base. Most of the money in Alberta is earned by, and therefore taxes paid by, rural dwellers.  The city dwellers benefit from rural tax payers.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (6 May 2015)

As the words were put in the mouth of a "Soviet" Senior Captain (played by Sean Connery of course): 

"A little revolution form time to time is not necessarily a bad thing"

That's what Albertans just did - and the NDP would do well to remember how they got there in their governance over the next four years.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (6 May 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> I read a study once that said that The Holocaust never happened, and if it did, they had it coming.  This is Alberta, Not Ontario that relies on industry in populated areas for it's tax base. Most of the money in Alberta is earned by, and therefore taxes paid by, rural dwellers.  The city dwellers benefit from rural tax payers.



I am going to call bull on this KS: Most of the money in Alberta is earned by the OIL INDUSTRY, not individual tax payers. Not changing that fact after almost 40 years of good industry development and revenue is what got the province, andMr. Prentice, where it is now.


----------



## Kirkhill (6 May 2015)

I think where Kat has a point is that many Albertans self-identify as rural Albertans regardless of how their income is earned.  Currently I am looking at buying a rural property as a cottage-semi-retirement place.  It is actually quite hard to find suitable rural land in Alberta.   It is much easier in Saskatchewan.  From this I conclude that Albertans have been living hybrid-rural lifestyles for quite a while and have been voting with their pickups and their dollars to escape the tight controls of city life neighbourhood design constraints and opting instead to live with fewer amenities but more freedom to build and live as they choose.

Some folks would rather live in a draughty shack their grandad built and drive a beat up pickup than live in downtown condo with all the amenities suitably inspected and regulated.


----------



## GAP (6 May 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> As the words were put in the mouth of a "Soviet" Senior Captain (played by Sean Connery of course):
> 
> "A little revolution form time to time is not necessarily a bad thing"
> 
> That's what Albertans just did - and the NDP would do well to remember how they got there in their governance over the next four years.



See Manitoba & Saskatchewan....and of course B.C. for examples.....


----------



## Kirkhill (6 May 2015)

GAP said:
			
		

> See Manitoba & Saskatchewan....and of course B.C. for examples.....



Or Egypt, Libya and Yugoslavia......


----------



## OldSolduer (6 May 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Agreed ... and I hear, on the radio, that Jim Prentice has resigned as PC leader and as a member of the legislature: presumably he'll return to Bay Street.
> 
> It will be interesting to see what kind of NDP they grow out in Alberta: is it the destructive, Canadian Labour Congress and academic led, child of David Lewis, Mel Watkins and Jim Laxer? Or is it the socially moderate and economically prudent child of the CCF and Tommy Douglas?



Perhaps it will be a close imitation of The Saskatchewan Party. I hear that Brad Wall has done some great things in the Gap.


----------



## Rifleman62 (6 May 2015)

recceguy beat me to it.

Photo from a friend in Edm taken this a.m.

Hell has frozen over.


----------



## cupper (6 May 2015)

So much for my effort to encourage my western relatives to vote Republican. ;D


----------



## Rocky Mountains (6 May 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I am going to call bull on this KS: Most of the money in Alberta is earned by the OIL INDUSTRY, not individual tax payers. Not changing that fact after almost 40 years of good industry development and revenue is what got the province, andMr. Prentice, where it is now.



The oil wells aren't in downtown Calgary, just the high paying jobs are.  The Alberta government spends little money out in the boonies.  The oil companies even have to build or pay to use tens of thousands of miles of private roads.


----------



## daftandbarmy (6 May 2015)

Calgary, 0800 hours today:  ;D


----------



## Halifax Tar (6 May 2015)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Calgary, 0800 hours today:  ;D



lol  that was awesome!  But you owe me a keyboard...


----------



## George Wallace (6 May 2015)

[tangent] Actually wasn't the Embassy roof, but an apartment block that a CIA operative lived in...... >


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 May 2015)

I contacted a (hopefully) future employer in the patch today and asked as to the morale.  daft's photo seems to be the current level of happiness and comfort with the new alien overlords.  They are chinstrapping to the max today.  I hope that this new reality doesn't further play havoc with my chances.  Things had already been pushed to the right by a further 18 months, before last night.


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 May 2015)

It's a mandate - anything around 40% in Canada is so - but vote splitting is in clear evidence.  I expect the NDP will be out if - and only if - the PC and Wildrose recombine.

Spending in rural areas seems disproportionately high because urban areas need food, lumber, concrete, petroleum products, electricity, steel, etc.; and these things are not to found in sufficient quantity in urban areas and the residents would not tolerate the industry necessary to turn the raw materials into finished goods regardless.  The urban tax money spent in rural areas is chiefly for the benefit of the urban areas.  No-one should delude themselves otherwise in pursuit of some infantile ideological talking point.


----------



## Edward Campbell (6 May 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> It's a mandate - anything around 40% in Canada is so - but vote splitting is in clear evidence.  _I expect the NDP will be out if - and only if - the PC and Wildrose recombine_.
> 
> Spending in rural areas seems disproportionately high because urban areas need food, lumber, concrete, petroleum products, electricity, steel, etc.; and these things are not to found in sufficient quantity in urban areas and the residents would not tolerate the industry necessary to turn the raw materials into finished goods regardless.  The urban tax money spent in rural areas is chiefly for the benefit of the urban areas.  No-one should delude themselves otherwise in pursuit of some infantile ideological talking point.




I agree but the analyses I have read suggest, to me, that the PCs and Wildrose have some deep and bitter differences and that reunification is going to require new, better leaders in both parties.

History suggests the Progressive Conservatives are dead in Alberta, but _conservatism_ is still alive and well. My reading of the historical entrails suggests, to me, that the some, (six or eight) PC MLAs should ~ in the interests of the province ~ do a Danielle Smith and cross the floor earlier rather than later.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (6 May 2015)

In my opinion there are few significant differences between the Wildrose and PCs.  I don't think there would even be a Wildrose Party if the PCs weren't running massive deficits when oil was over $100 per barrel and super-massive deficits with oil bottoming out close to $40.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (6 May 2015)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> BC and Saskatchewan real estate are about to go on a tear...



Already started ....


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 May 2015)

>I agree but the analyses I have read suggest, to me, that the PCs and Wildrose have some deep and bitter differences and that reunification is going to require new, better leaders in both parties.

Concur.  This has the same general appearance as 1993.  One of the factions (the "establishment") among the "Progressive" conservatives gets too clever by half and too complacent and too dismissive of the other faction(s), and the party splinters.

Thus I disagree with the "quitter" assessment of Prentice.  His decision is refreshing.  He put his ideas and time on the table, and the voters - urban and rural - swiped left.  He is near 60, he has skills in demand, and the NDP has a decisive majority.  It's a waste of his time to hang around warming an opposition bench (not even the Oppo Leader's chair).  It's pathetic to hang around waiting as if it's the CO's chair in a militia regiment with too many majors.  There is no decent interval required before resigning.

Alberta conservatives now need someone who fits the Harper template - some ideas on governing the province, some ideas for reuniting the right, a willingness to risk some years on the project, and enough years ahead to do so.  Prentice is not that person.


----------



## X Royal (6 May 2015)

What I've not seen in this thread is any comment on how this election result may play in the next federal election.
Yes federal and provincial politics are not the same but similar voting trends do exist. Pissed off at a provincial party can carry over to the federal party and when the elections happen somewhat close to each other this can be more relevant.
If the federal Conservatives lose some of their(_notice I said some not all_)western support/seats it will surely hurt their chances in the next federal election.
Quebec and urban Ontario are not a hot bed for the Conservatives. Generally southern rural Ontario is a Conservative supporter but that isn't a lot of seats compared to the urban seats and those in the northern part of Ontario.


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 May 2015)

X Royal said:
			
		

> What I've not seen in this thread is any comment on how this election result may play in the next federal election.
> Yes federal and provincial politics are not the same but similar voting trends do exist. Pissed off at a provincial party can carry over to the federal party and when the elections happen somewhat close to each other this can be more relevant.
> If the federal Conservatives lose some of their(_notice I said some not all_)western support/seats it will surely hurt their chances in the next federal election.
> Quebec and urban Ontario are not a hot bed for the Conservatives. Generally southern rural Ontario is a Conservative supporter but that isn't a lot of seats compared to the urban seats and those in the northern part of Ontario.



I would think that PM Harper shit a very large and sharp cornered brick at this result.  This is his Base of Operations, and a hard swing to the left is not going to be any help to him.


----------



## Brad Sallows (6 May 2015)

Is Wildrose running federal candidates in AB?  If not, are Wildrose voters more likely to back Liberals or Conservatives?

What was the percentage sum of Wildrose and PC support?


----------



## Alberta Bound (7 May 2015)

Brad S, 

So you volunteer to fix a problem,  use an autocratic style that offends all your subordinates and when toppled from your throne you decide that the minions don't appreciate you and scurry into the night. Without so much as leaving some plan for your loyal followers to carry on. 

You find that "refreshing". Interesting leadership style. Interesting mind set. I would like to see any circumstance where that would be the preferred style.


----------



## Alberta Bound (7 May 2015)

Albertans will always have the rural - urban back and forth. But the rural areas often did well under the PCs. Many miles of well paved roads even to lower population areas. Airports with paved strips and small terminals where other provinces would never pay for them. Not many people flying to Manning AB. Hospitals in many of those same small communities when it didn't financially make sense Grimshaw AB 20 kms from another hospital in Peace River AB. Provincial Bldgs all over the place with space to spare. Plus more. 

Poor future planning put the province in a bind. Poor politicking put the PCs out the door. They just couldn't stop drinking their own ............... cool aid.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 May 2015)

"So you volunteer to fix a problem,  use an autocratic style that offends all your subordinates and when toppled from your throne you decide that the minions don't appreciate you and scurry into the night. Without so much as leaving some plan for your loyal followers to carry on.

You find that "refreshing". Interesting leadership style. Interesting mind set. I would like to see any circumstance where that would be the preferred style."

Don't try to decide for me what parts of the whole episode I found "refreshing" if you didn't understand what I wrote.  What I found refreshing is his decision to resign and move on without tarrying to no purpose.  The rest is all yours if you want to address it.

The voters don't like him - we know that.  Why they don't like him is beside the point.  Again, what is refreshing is that he is moving along quickly.  If he is the problem, followers (loyal or otherwise) don't need him poisoning the well and leaving a "plan" for them to execute.

With respect to that point alone - departing immediately when you have failed, and not burdening those left behind with a legacy of your failure - I have a strong preference.  I can't imagine any circumstance in business or war in which the "preferred style" expected of a sacked CEO or commander is to leave a set of instructions for his successor to follow, or expect his legacy and vision to be protected.


----------



## Zartan (7 May 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> "So you volunteer to fix a problem,  use an autocratic style that offends all your subordinates and when toppled from your throne you decide that the minions don't appreciate you and scurry into the night. Without so much as leaving some plan for your loyal followers to carry on.
> 
> You find that "refreshing". Interesting leadership style. Interesting mind set. I would like to see any circumstance where that would be the preferred style."
> 
> ...



You do realise he was running for election to the Legislature, not President of the United States? He won his seat by a large margin (perhaps the PC's largest, not sure), and immediately resigned it rather than serving in the opposition. His former constituents are rightly livid at his bad faith, his lack of sense of duty, and I don't think the PCs have a snowball's chance in the looming by-election.


----------



## The Bread Guy (7 May 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> I would think that PM Harper shit a very large and sharp cornered brick at this result.  This is his Base of Operations, and a hard swing to the left is not going to be any help to him.


Not to mention the morale boost the left across Canada gets (hard to quantify, I know, but I don't think zero) from knowing "if Alberta can kick out the Tories/elect the NDP, it might happen elsewhere."  I doubt one will lead to the other, but it will sure crank 'em up.

Also, this may give the federal Tories something to think about re:  maybe having to spend more resources/energy to keep seats in AB than they've had to in the past.


----------



## Alberta Bound (7 May 2015)

Brad

He ran for MLA, he won. So doing the job he was elected to do is beneath him?

He told Albertans that if he was their Premier he was going to follow the plan he laid out. Albertans before the election said very strongly they agreed with most of his plan but strongly objected to a couple areas. In a couple areas he changed his plan. In areas where it involved business he flatly refused to change his plan. 

Alberta voters strongly decided his refusal to amend his plan was incorrect for Alberta. 

He was still an MLA and a voice for his constituents and a champion of his beliefs.  

Maybe he honestly thought the honourable thing was to quit instantly. Why don't more losers do that? 

Maybe he didn't think the optics for himself and the PCs would be him running away in the dark so that he would not have to assist the incoming govt and face the NDP. 

I wonder why all the other non reflected MLAs didn't simply quit the party immediately along with those that did get reelected but will no longer be in the majority. 

Hmmm.


----------



## Kat Stevens (7 May 2015)

I personally think this is a case of a petulant child throwing his teddy out of the pram, and in the next few days he will come to regret a knee jerk reaction.  I'm no Prentice flag waver, and frankly think he got exactly what he had coming with his "relax, I got this" approach to the whole election.  The people who elected him to a seat have the right to expect him to show up and do the job he applied for, naive as it may be of me to think so.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (7 May 2015)

The socialists have a real problem.  The PCs governed like NDP.  Prentice increased every tax but income tax and oil royalties.  His budget also had a $5 billion deficit.  The public service is already grossly overpaid compared to the rest of Canada.  The NDP made a lot of promises and owe a lot of debts.  If they actually deliver anything, we're screwed.


----------



## Kirkhill (7 May 2015)

Just a reminder - we've had bad governments before and we're still here.

Bastards still keep making idiotic decisions - but I have managed to raise a family paying taxes to a variety of governments all over Canada and even in the States, despite the rules made by idiotic bastards.

We'll just have to try and reduce the damage at the next opportunity.


----------



## dapaterson (7 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Just a reminder - we've had bad governments before and we're still here.
> 
> Bastards still keep making idiotic decisions - but I have managed to raise a family paying taxes to a variety of governments all over Canada and even in the States, despite the rules made by idiotic bastards.
> 
> *We'll just have to try and reduce the damage at the next opportunity.*



I think that was the thought process of many in Alberta - after 44 years, they looked in the mirror and didn't like what they saw.


----------



## ModlrMike (7 May 2015)

I saw this commentary yesterday. Now, accepting that he's engaging in a good deal of hyperbole, if even half of what he fears comes true it could be hard times ahead indeed.

I wouldn't invest in NDP's Alberta: O'Leary

On the flip side, there's this:

Prentice will be Prime Minister one day: Doak


----------



## KJK (7 May 2015)

I don't think Mr. O'Leary's comments are too far off the mark. Look what happened when Stelmach did his royalty reviews. Oil company spending stopped cold. These major projects take many years from concept to completion. Why would you attempt to build one when the taxes and royalties could change every year. Especially when BC and SK have stable royalties and more business friendly governments. Add to this mess a glut of oil in North America......

A more interesting question for me anyway is: If Notley and her SJW destroy the economy of AB who is going to be a 'Have" province in Canada? Who is going to be generating the money to send to these provinces who are addicted to AB's oil revenue? If I were a Premier of one of these provinces I would be very concerned. Who knows, maybe 1-2 of them may become 'Have' provinces and end up paying rather than receiving.


----------



## Kirkhill (7 May 2015)

Few would mistake me for an NDP apologist but:

On the subject of royalties didn't Ms. Notley say something to the effect that she was going to empower a People's Commission to review the royalty structure and determine if Albertans were getting value for money.  I believe that could be seen as the NDPs version of kicking the subject into the long grass.  (If they were Tories it would be a Royal Commission ....hmm ....Prediction: 2 years of deliberations by well paid party faithful followed by a recommendation to change "royalties" to "peopleties".)


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 May 2015)

You're in good hands Alberta










http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/05/06/deborah-drever-ndp-photos_n_7227972.html


----------



## KJK (7 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Few would mistake me for an NDP apologist but:
> 
> On the subject of royalties didn't Ms. Notley say something to the effect that she was going to empower a People's Commission to review the royalty structure and determine if Albertans were getting value for money.  I believe that could be seen as the NDPs version of kicking the subject into the long grass.  (If they were Tories it would be a Royal Commission ....hmm ....Prediction: 2 years of deliberations by well paid party faithful followed by a recommendation to change "royalties" to "peopleties".)



The problem with this is, the longer the oil companies don't know what will happen the longer their wallets will remain closed. They certainly won't trust what she says in closed door meeting, not when you look at the NDP's record in other province. If oil were to go to $90 or higher they might start spending but with no support from her on pipelines and low oil prices why bother? Another thought: We are already short of power here yet she wants to close coal fired power stations. What will happen to electricity prices?


----------



## George Wallace (7 May 2015)

KJK said:
			
		

> I don't think Mr. O'Leary's comments are too far off the mark. Look what happened when Stelmach did his royalty reviews. Oil company spending stopped cold. These major projects take many years from concept to completion. Why would you attempt to build one when the taxes and royalties could change every year. Especially when BC and SK have stable royalties and more business friendly governments. Add to this mess a glut of oil in North America......
> 
> A more interesting question for me anyway is: If Notley and her SJW destroy the economy of AB who is going to be a 'Have" province in Canada? Who is going to be generating the money to send to these provinces who are addicted to AB's oil revenue? If I were a Premier of one of these provinces I would be very concerned. Who knows, maybe 1-2 of them may become 'Have' provinces and end up paying rather than receiving.



An even more interesting question would be: Can we see a swing in the Oil Patch, where the oil wells in Saskatchewan are uncapped and those in Alberta are in turn capped?  Could the Oil companies move out of Calgary and into a more favourable location?  Is it time for the Saskatchewan Government to open their arms and welcome 'Big Oil' with incentives?


----------



## Kirkhill (7 May 2015)

George, about the only thing that would have to move would be the PO Box.  Brad Walls has pretty much uncapped all the oil wells in Saskatchewan (just like that F'ing hypocrite in BC has - she'll sell gas and coal and flood valleys for exportable hydro and buy "dirty" electricity from Alberta).  

If you drive down Highway 4 from Rosetown to Swift Current - as you get to Swift Current the country side is awash in pumpjacks and storage batteries have sprung up like mushrooms.

Saskatoon is a nice place to live and do business - Regina is Edmonton but with a stronger socialist cadre.


----------



## George Wallace (7 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Saskatoon is a nice place to live and do business - Regina is Edmonton but with a stronger socialist cadre.



Having lived in Saskatoon, I found it was a clean, beautiful city comparable to Ottawa.  Regina is a 'Dust Bowl'.  Last time I was in Saskatoon, about five years ago, the city was attracting hundreds of new jobs and business, showing quite a bit of promise; getting away from being only a quiet 'University Town' and relying on the Potash industry.


----------



## George Wallace (7 May 2015)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> You're in good hands Alberta
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Failed FB 101.  

Hopefully not to be appointed to any position of authority, relegated to the Back Benches until such time that her constituents clue in and depose her.

Is that asking too much?


----------



## ModlrMike (7 May 2015)

To those who say lay off... I can accept that she's mugging for the camera in the first picture; some youthful exuberance if you will. For the second picture... There's no situation where showing such disrespect is acceptable. Freedom of speech notwithstanding, there's still no excuse.

But, you get the government you deserve!


----------



## Kirkhill (7 May 2015)

The "wanker" line for me was - "That wasn't my finger".  

No. Maybe. But definitely your page and your posting.


----------



## daftandbarmy (7 May 2015)

Meanwhile, in Edmonton


----------



## RedcapCrusader (7 May 2015)

Drever is an interesting character:

Her's another gem:
http://www.genuinewitty.com/2015/05/06/breaking-alberta-ndp-gets-their-weasel-on-deletes-candidate-biographies-from-website/
They've scrubbed their website, kinda sketchy if you ask me; BUT you can still give them money. Hmmmm.

Also, Drever continues to set an interesting pattern





Hating "sense of entitlement" isn't that primarily a Conservative platform? Yet she's now part of the Government under a party that wants to basically increase entitlements and the sense that follows. Raising minimum wage to $15, increasing taxes and social services.


----------



## Brad Sallows (7 May 2015)

>He ran for MLA, he won. So doing the job he was elected to do is beneath him?

Yes, yes.  Each candidate runs for "MLA".  The elected body has the power to choose its own leader.  Etc. Etc.

Back in the real world: Prentice came out of private life to be Premier, or not.

This relates to the occasional lamentation that not enough good people come forward to serve in (elected) public life.   Our political system is structured to support it in theory (nothing prohibits mixed party cabinet appointments), but not in practice.  There are some people willing to put a term in on the backbenches or in opposition, and some who expect to be put to productive use immediately, or they will leave.  All that whining about Prentice's abrupt departure will do is discourage everyone not interested in marking time in politics.  That will leave us with the party stalwarts and time servers.


----------



## Alberta Bound (8 May 2015)

Ahhh, Prentice was too good for the little work. Our bad we should have recognized his greatness. 

Reminds me of a recruit we had once. Had many academic post nominals after his name. Put them all on his card. He couldn't understand why he wasn't made an Inspector immediately. Couldn't we recognize how great he was. 

I am going to walk away from this now. Even though it is entertaining. Possibly you should also walk away. From the cool aid.


----------



## ModlrMike (8 May 2015)

A well reasoned piece from a longtime Alberta conservative:

Rachel Notley: The Accidental Premier


----------



## Alberta Bound (8 May 2015)

MM

That article was right on the money!


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 May 2015)

Same thing happened when Bob Rae found himself in the driver's seat.  Everyone had the same, brain fart, protest vote.  And bingo, hell froze over.  Good article.


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 May 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> A well reasoned piece from a longtime Alberta conservative:
> 
> Rachel Notley: The Accidental Premier




And Danielle Smith made a similar point in an opinion piece in the _Globe and Mail_. But, _I think_ Mr Rathgerber's 3rd point is the key and it has two aspects:

     1. The PC Party's record, which, as both Brent Rathgerner and Danielle Smith pointed out, has been somewhat less than _conservative_ since Ralph Klein retired; and

     2. Premier Prentice's budget was *unpopular* ~ that doesn't mean it was a bad budget, in many respects, _in my opinion_, it was a good and necessary budget ~ plus it was badly managed. Premier Prentice should have,
         on behalf of his party, taken responsibility for the bad economic decisions that go back to Peter Lougheed, 40 years ago, who did not (adequately) _safeguard_ the Alberta Heritage Savings Trust Fund from _raids_ by
         irresponsible PC premiers like Stelmach and Redford. Plus, of course, Premier Prentice gratuitously insulted Albertans ("look in the mirror") for having elected PC government after PC government.


Edit: added one word to correct the grammar  :-[


----------



## Underway (8 May 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> ... Premier Prentice gratuitously insulted Albertans ("look in the mirror") for elected PC government after PC government.



On this site I thought we appreciated people who say it like it is    ?  Was it insulting?  Perhaps.  Was it honest and true?  Yes.  Most people don't like it when you point out that their situation is self inflicted.  Like an earlier poster said you get the government that you deserve.  I thought the days of King Ralph were an embarrassment, and that the PC party was done the moment they started handing out $400 cheques vice actually saving for the future.  And now Albertans have no savings and a big deficit... look in the mirror indeed.

Many of my friends in Alberta are freaking out, and my response is, "well someone had to vote for the NDP, they got 40%+ of the popular vote", only to be met by silence (meaning they probably voted NDP).  This is EXACTLY the same response that happened after the NDP win in Ontario.  No one would confess to voting NDP when 4 out of 10 people did.  I suspect those complaining the loudest are trying to cover their tracks...

That being said the Alberta NDP party is not leftist, its left of centre, more akin to the Liberals in Ontario or NS, just like the PC party is not right wing, its right of centre.  Its not like the Bob Rae NDP which were actually socialists.

And for who is going to pay the bills in transfer payments... don't worry, after a 5 years of essentially breaking even Ontario is back.


----------



## dapaterson (8 May 2015)

So, how will the NDP make Alberta more of a socialist paradise?  Alberta already has more public workers per capita and pays them more and spends more on public service per capita than that rabid hotbed of socialists, Ontario.

In other words, Wynne has presided over a more fiscally conservative government than Prentice did.  >


----------



## Kat Stevens (8 May 2015)

Underway said:
			
		

> On this site I thought we appreciated people who say it like it is    ?  Was it insulting?  Perhaps.  Was it honest and true?  Yes.  Most people don't like it when you point out that their situation is self inflicted.  Like an earlier poster said you get the government that you deserve.  I thought the days of King Ralph were an embarrassment, and that the PC party was done the moment they started handing out $400 cheques vice actually saving for the future.  And now Albertans have no savings and a big deficit... look in the mirror indeed.



It was a stupid and arrogant statement, and that's why it bit him on the ass.  Just to be clear, you'd be okay if you hired someone to do a job with a very handsome pay and benefits package, entrusted them to steer the ship, and then when they run the company up on the rocks, be told "your fault dude, you hired me"?


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 May 2015)

Underway said:
			
		

> On this site I thought we appreciated people who say it like it is    ?  Was it insulting?  Perhaps.  Was it honest and true?  Yes.  Most people don't like it when you point out that their situation is self inflicted.  Like an earlier poster said you get the government that you deserve.  I thought the days of King Ralph were an embarrassment, and that the PC party was done the moment they started handing out $400 cheques vice actually saving for the future.  And now Albertans have no savings and a big deficit... look in the mirror indeed.
> 
> Many of my friends in Alberta are freaking out, and my response is, "well someone had to vote for the NDP, they got 40%+ of the popular vote", only to be met by silence (meaning they probably voted NDP).  This is EXACTLY the same response that happened after the NDP win in Ontario.  No one would confess to voting NDP when 4 out of 10 people did.  I suspect those complaining the loudest are trying to cover their tracks...
> 
> ...




I'm not suggesting he was wrong, in fact _I believe_ he was right: we do, usually, get the governments were deserve and governments do, usually, do what we ask. But the blame shouldn't rest with Albertans for _asking_; the blame should rest with successive PC governments for _doing_ as the people asked when _doing_ defied economic good sense.


----------



## George Wallace (8 May 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> It was a stupid and arrogant statement, and that's why it bit him on the ass.  Just to be clear, you'd be okay if you hired someone to do a job with a very handsome pay and benefits package, entrusted them to steer the ship, and then when they run the company up on the rocks, be told "your fault dude, you hired me"?



Just backs up the saying that "the Truth Hurts".  "You did hire him."   Don't try and shift the blame, or say it is wrong.  The voters put him there; just as they have now put the NDP into power.  The voters got what they wanted.  

The Protest vote proved to be effective.  Not the first time it has happened.  Not the last.  The arrogance of numerous political figures has proven to be their undoing, and those future political figures who continue down that road, too arrogant to learn from that historical fact, are just as likely to follow suit.


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 May 2015)

First, you have to understand that the _Good Grey Globe_'s Jeffrey Simpson doesn't like Alberta; he is, personally, offended by the notion that Alberta, _red neck_, unenlightened, _conservative_, damned near _foreign_ Alberta sits on all that oil while the _Laurentian elites_ in Ontario and Quebec have none. That being said, _I think_ he's about right in this column which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/will-albertans-finally-look-in-the-mirror/article24326547/


> Will Albertans finally look in the mirror?
> 
> JEFFREY SIMPSON
> The Globe and Mail
> ...




Now, I take issue with several things he says, especially in the last paragraph, but the general thrust is correct:

     1. The PC Party lost its way ~ it was careless, lazy and self delusional ~ the last few PC governments were, indeed, "second rate;"

     2. Alberta is, from a revenue perspective, still a "one trick pony," and that means that it needs good, even excellent, management (for which, see Norway, for example, with 5 million people occupying 150,00 square miles vs.
         Alberta with 4 million living in 250,000 square miles) which isn't a _left_ versus _right_ thing, it's a smart and tough vs weak and stupid thing; and

     3. The "hard truths" now need to be acknowledged and corrected for by Premier elect Notley.

I take issue with Jeffrey Simpson's last paragraph. It's too soon to tell if Albertans voted for the NDP; we'll find that out in 2019 is they can be re-elected. What is certain is that they voted against the PCs.


----------



## Underway (8 May 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> It was a stupid and arrogant statement, and that's why it bit him on the ***.  Just to be clear, you'd be okay if you hired someone to do a job with a very handsome pay and benefits package, entrusted them to steer the ship, and then when they run the company up on the rocks, be told "your fault dude, you hired me"?



A little bit disingenuous but I'll bite.  What actually happened is that you had an appointed guy who was NOT hired by you because the previous incumbent resigned and this new guy is backfilling.  This backfill said that the last bunch of guys you hired were morons because THEY ran the company up on the rocks and that its YOUR fault because YOU hired the wrong people.  Don't get angry now that you took his advice, changed your hiring practices and found the incumbent didn't meet the new job criteria.

Btb government comparisons to companies only go so far.  I find they warp the view on governments and their roles and create unreasonable expectations.

Alberta might not be "conservative" anymore, but no one does "someone else screwed me faux rage" better than Albertans.  Take some responsibility for your own actions Alberta.  Its the sign of a mature voting population.  And look... Albertans did take responsibility and turfed the gov't proving Prentice was right.  

As for the freak out reaction I think what is happening is a bit of buyers remorse right now.  Change after 42 years of the same thing can't be comfortable.


----------



## Kirkhill (8 May 2015)

All of these folks from outside demanding we "look in the mirror", suggesting that we are an unlikeable, unlovely bunch of red necks that, if only we would look harder at ourselves we would see the error of our ways.

I am not given to foul language (at least not in public) but in this instance I will make an exception. To all those encouraging us to look in the mirror: FOAD!  Or more explicitly F*CK OFF AND DIE.

Albertans have a very keen sense of self.  The reason the PC party is no longer on offer is that it no longer was recognizable to Albertans as Albertan.

My guess is that in 4 years time the PCs and the Wildrose will not merge.  Instead the PCs will fold and the Wildrose will absorb the PC vote.  In so doing the Wildrose will move more towards Ralph Klein's laisser-faire centre.

And just like the English - the more outsiders push the more Albertans will push back.


----------



## Edward Campbell (8 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> All of these folks from outside demanding we "look in the mirror", suggesting that we are an unlikeable, unlovely bunch of red necks that, if only we would look harder at ourselves we would see the error of our ways.
> 
> I am not given to foul language (at least not in public) but in this instance I will make an exception. To all those encouraging us to look in the mirror: FOAD!  Or more explicitly F*CK OFF AND DIE.
> 
> ...




Makes eminent good sense to me.


----------



## Underway (8 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> All of these folks from outside demanding we "look in the mirror", suggesting that we are an unlikeable, unlovely bunch of red necks that, if only we would look harder at ourselves we would see the error of our ways.
> 
> I am not given to foul language (at least not in public) but in this instance I will make an exception. To all those encouraging us to look in the mirror: FOAD!  Or more explicitly **** OFF AND DIE.



Just to be clear I never ever suggested that Alberta is an unlovely bunch of rednecks.  I love Alberta and Albertans and they are eminently likeable.  I love their politics and their way of challenging the normally held viewpoints in politics.  I'm just adding my  :2c: as a dispassionate observer.  

As for the "folks from the outside" etc... please... The Western victim card is so old.  Its almost as boorish as the Quebec victim card.  Comments like that just encourage the whole redneck stereotype and do you a disservice.  

Its not like Alberta hasn't been crabbing to everyone else in the country "Why don't you vote Conservative?  You know what you all need?  Conservatives!  Damn Liberal easterners!" (I've heard them all) for decades now.  People are going to take a little schadenfreude at Alberta's expense.  Jealousy at the oil wealth and irritation at a percived "holier than thou" attitude are a toxic combo.  There's going to be shots taken.


----------



## Remius (8 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> And just like the English - the more outsiders push the more Albertans will push back.



This brought up a few thoughts.  I wonder what the influence of so many outsiders re-locating to Alberta had on the election.

I have no numbers or statistics right now but maybe that played/plays a role in this result?

Thoughts?


----------



## KJK (8 May 2015)

Crantor said:
			
		

> This brought up a few thoughts.  I wonder what the influence of so many outsiders re-locating to Alberta had on the election.
> 
> I have no numbers or statistics right now but maybe that played/plays a role in this result?
> 
> Thoughts?


There is no doubt that played a role. At my wife's workplace there are several immigrants from socialist countries and several people from ON. They were all pushing the NDP agenda and were thrilled to see them elected. Native Albertans there not so much.


----------



## dapaterson (8 May 2015)

Statscan on the urban/rural split in Alberta, over time: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/demo62j-eng.htm

Since the 1950s, the majority of Albertans have been urban dwellers.  Two thirds of Albertans live in the Calgary and Edmonton Census Metropolitan areas.


----------



## Underway (8 May 2015)

KJK said:
			
		

> There is no doubt that played a role. At my wife's workplace there are several immigrants from socialist countries and several people from ON. They were all pushing the NDP agenda and were thrilled to see them elected. Native Albertans there not so much.



Why am I thinking about this guy right now....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Parizeau#/media/File:Jacques_Parizeau1.jpg

Please continue with the redneck stereotypes...  its all immigrants and easterners fault  :.   It is a valid line of questioning though.  Alberta has been undergoing a massive cultural change with so many new residents who bring different experiences.  How much did that influence the vote or really was it down to the PC screwing things up.

At my wifes work everyone wanted a NDP minority, and think that they overshot the mark.  And they are all Edmontonians who work in Calgary.... which I guess is equivalent to an immigrant from a socialist country when you think about it knowing internal provincial rivalries .

*edited for spelling*


----------



## Fishbone Jones (8 May 2015)

Many of those same _'immigrants'_ are now leaving, to go back east, because their high paying jobs are gone with the oil sands closure.

If the NDP retain their hold in four years, Albertans will have to look inwards to themselves, instead of scapegoating others.


----------



## Kirkhill (8 May 2015)

I am an immigrant Canadian AND Albertan.  After living virtually every where in Canada I have chosen to become an Albertan - and stay an Albertan.  Because I love everything that we rednecks are. (And I come from the land of the original rednecks).

I have no desire for Alberta to leave Canada - and I can enjoy yanking chains in Saskatchewan and BC.

However I have no time at all for "Holy Joes" of any religion proselytizing in my lug.  Jenny Geddes is a longstanding folk heroine of mine - not for any nationalist proclivities but for her clear and honest statement of wanting to be left alone with her own beliefs - "Wha daur say mass in my lug!"

And if you come to me, demeaning my beliefs as the simple whinings of a victim then I could start to sympathize with my ancestors dishing out the Merindol treatment - and spit ye fae erse tae gullet.

Your lot may whine, whoever the hell you are.  But I have never heard an Albertan whine.

As to the rest of the IMMIGRANTS.  I came out to Calgary in 1980 when the locals were starting to marvel at the changes as the City went through the 250,000 mark.  There were many immigrants then, just like me.  My boss was a Kapitan in the Erste Fallschirmjager at Monte Cassino and in Russia and with Skorzeny.  He was captured during the battle of the bulge.  Two of my fellow managers were also immigrants. One had previously met the Fallschirmjager on Cassino - they exchanged pleasantries.  Those other two managers were more typical of the majority of the immigrants to Alberta. They emigrated from farms in the stagnant socialist economy of Saskatchewan and immigrated into the more lively and profitable city of Calgary.  There we capitalised on the oil boom by supplying milk, ice cream and popsicles....

My wife, is another immigrant.  She immigrated from Saskatoon - as did most of her high school class.  

These folks, we folks, are now Albertans.  And we are not running away.  We came here by choice. We stay by choice and we stay because we like the company.

Now as to the NDP surge - Barristas and Students do not a society make.  The NDP exploited a seam created by Alison Redford and her takeover of the PCs.  Many of us sat this election out - and we allowed the NDP to come along that seam.

The NDP have an opportunity.  If they use it well they might get a chance at a second term.  But it is unlikely that the rank and file Albertan will sit out the next election.

Just as in Britain where the SNP drove Liberal Democrats and UKIP voters into the arms of David Cameron I fully expect the NDP to energize the creation of another laisser-faire party.


----------



## daftandbarmy (8 May 2015)

Meanwhile, at the bunker  ;D

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyXyxLiDtHo


----------



## Kirkhill (8 May 2015)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Meanwhile, at the bunker  ;D
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyXyxLiDtHo



Scunners and limmers, the hale feckin'  lot o' ye.   ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 May 2015)

daftandbarmy said:
			
		

> Meanwhile, at the bunker  ;D
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyXyxLiDtHo



:rofl:

I've been hoping and waiting for someone to do a parody.  Excellent laugh.  mil points in bound


----------



## Kirkhill (8 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> I am an immigrant Canadian AND Albertan.  After living virtually every where in Canada I have chosen to become an Albertan - and stay an Albertan.  Because I love everything that we rednecks are. (And I come from the land of the original rednecks).
> 
> I have no desire for Alberta to leave Canada - and I can enjoy yanking chains in Saskatchewan and BC.
> 
> ...



One measure of fitness is recovery time - the time from stress to normalcy.  I have no idea what a 2 hour and 15 minute recovery time means in this case but... it might mean something.  I leave that to the rest of you to figure out.

I apologize.

I don't retract my words because I meant everyone of them.  I apologize because I allowed myself to utter them.  Normally I try to maintain a degree more decorum and not give full vent to a rant.  Most of my "rants" are tailored and trimmed.  

It serves nobody well to allow their feelings to get the better of them as I did.  For allowing that to occur: I apologize.

Underway: 

You took the brunt of the explosion.  Again, I apologize to you for the explosion.  And for that only.

In some respects you were an "innocent" bystander.  My original rant about "looking in mirrors" was occasioned by Jeffrey Simpson.  It was only after I posted my response to the Simpson posting that I realized that you too were advising "soul searching".  I stand by my position on the people that offer that advice. A couple of phrases come to mind - phrases about putting your own house in order and worrying about motes in other folks eyes while ignoring the beam in your own.  That applies equally to Jeffrey Simpson and to those various others that are offering to provide Albertans with mirrors.

I try, even when failing, not to criticize folks for the decisions they make - except if they are people that I have hired to make decisions on my behalf - politicians and bureaucrats are fair game, even moreso when they fail to make any decisions.  I don't mind debating my own decisions or my own beliefs.  I only suggest that the debate be a civil and respectful as possible.

In permitting my explosion this morning I failed in that regard, again.  And for that explosion, for that tone, I apologize.

Chris.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 May 2015)

>Ahhh, Prentice was too good for the little work. Our bad we should have recognized his greatness. 

Something like that.  His was the manner of a consultant, not a salesman.  It is ineffective politically.  But that reflects what happened prior to the election.  Post-election, maybe he did feel he was too good for the job of rebuilding the party.  Also plausible is that he felt he was the wrong person for the job.  People who do well and are not bombastic generally know their areas of expertise and limitations and stick to the former.

It's clearer now what happened.  Some of the voters pitched a fit one election too late, and overshot the mark irrevocably.  A majority is pretty much beyond reach until the next election.  Those voters are choked, but no-one likes to be angry with himself.  Prentice is the guy they want to give the pokey-chest treatment to and force him to apologize for his mean words and be contrite.  He has chosen not to be a pinata.  That makes some people angrier.  Also, experience shows that split parties do not necessarily re-unite in time for the next election, which means the NDP could be in for an additional term.  More anger accumulates, all of it wanting to go somewhere except inward.

Again, Prentice isn't the one who had a snit - some of the voters are.  The more complaints about him that pile up, the clearer it is that he has done conservatives a favour by departing quickly.  Every election there are people from all points on the political map vowing to withhold votes, or vote against their usual interests, or otherwise handle their vote in some way to express displeasure.  But voters do not have that luxury: they are responsible, not the politicians.


----------



## Underway (9 May 2015)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> One measure of fitness is recovery time - the time from stress to normalcy.  I have no idea what a 2 hour and 15 minute recovery time means in this case but... it might mean something.  I leave that to the rest of you to figure out.
> 
> I apologize.
> 
> ...



Hey no problems.  A little heat is warranted around here sometimes.


----------



## CougarKing (10 May 2015)

Comparative government 101 of Poli Sci: the electoral system edition. How Alberta/Canada compares to other countries' electoral systems.

Ottawa Citizen



> *Stephen Maher: Alberta NDP won a false majority because of our outmoded electoral system*
> 
> On election night in Alberta, former Wildrose leader Danielle Smith tweeted: “Combined PC-WRP vote is 52%. NDP vote is 42%. #justsaying”.
> 
> ...


----------



## Underway (11 May 2015)

So what you're saying is that the Conservatives are now suffering from the same system that they supported for decades because it kept them in power, and now that they are out the system is outdated??  Pot this is kettle....

Its funny how the parties in power think the system works just fine, until they are no longer in power.  Federally the only parties that agree with the current system are the ones that think they can consistantly win with the current system, the Grits and Tories....


----------



## ModlrMike (11 May 2015)

Underway said:
			
		

> Pot this is kettle....



Yes, and the same people who claimed the federal Torries illegitimate for taking 38% of the vote are curiously silent now.


----------



## Brasidas (11 May 2015)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Yes, and the same people who claimed the federal Torries illegitimate for taking 38% of the vote are curiously silent now.



...federal Liberals, 93-06...


----------



## Kat Stevens (11 May 2015)

I believe the line goes "the majority of Albertans did NOT vote for the NDP"  or something like that.


----------



## daftandbarmy (11 May 2015)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> I believe the line goes "the majority of Albertans did NOT vote for the NDP"  or something like that.



At least more than half of them voted:

Alberta's voter turnout for yesterday's provincial election was the highest the province has seen in 22 years. 

According to Elections Alberta, more than half of Albertans cast a vote, with 1,481,477 out of 2,543,127 eligible voters making their way to the polls.

That equals 58.25 per cent of the population. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/05/06/alberta-voter-turnout_n_7224496.html


----------



## Colin Parkinson (11 May 2015)

Not sure what the Provincial NDP is like there, but the NDP historical has a decent grassroots organization, not as good as the CPC's but far better than the Liberals have ever had.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (13 May 2015)

An interesting follow-on to the change of government.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/rachel-notley-orders-end-to-all-government-document-shredding-1.3072555


> Rachel Notley orders end to all government document shredding
> Directive comes hours after privacy commissioner launched unprecedented investigation
> 
> CBC News Posted: May 13, 2015 10:45 AM MT| Last Updated: May 13, 2015 3:03 PM MT
> ...


----------



## jollyjacktar (14 May 2015)

Ezra Levant is reporting Ms Notley has appointed Mr. Brian Topp as her CoS.  Ezra is claiming he is rabidly against the Sands and Pipelines.  Not good news for the future if true.


----------



## PuckChaser (14 May 2015)

So what happens when all of the provinces are have not provinces? I highly doubt the NDP are going to cut services, only jack up taxes and hope it works out on the balance sheet.


----------



## George Wallace (14 May 2015)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> So what happens when all of the provinces are have not provinces? I highly doubt the NDP are going to cut services, only jack up taxes and hope it works out on the balance sheet.



Then all those morons from the 1970's who collected Pogey and plastered "Make the Rich Pay" signs all over the place have won.

I asked one of these people what would happen when all the 'Rich' had paid and had now become poor, making her richer than the formerly 'Rich'?  She could not wrap it around her mind that she would land up having to pay.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (14 May 2015)

The Alberta NDP has a serious problem because the PCs governed like socialists.  Despite endless whining, Alberta probably has the best social programs outside of Quebec.  Coincidentally we are paying for both of them.  To do anything new, the $5 billion deficit will go up as will taxes.  I suspect we will see a lot of the BS and little of NDP economics in the next 4 years.  Much NDP economics and the tax revenue will dry up as international capital heads for greener pastures.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 May 2015)

or if the big companies are smart place the NDP over the barrel and get better deals on royalties and such to stay.


----------



## daftandbarmy (16 May 2015)

Meanwhile, in Alberta    ;D


----------



## a_majoor (16 May 2015)

The American Interest on how the oilsands and NDP will interact:

http://www.the-american-interest.com/2015/05/15/troubled-times-for-albertan-oil/



> *Troubled Times for Albertan Oil*
> 
> When the left-leaning New Democratic Party ousted the more oil-friendly Progressive Conservatives in Alberta’s recent elections, greens hailed the results as a death knell for oil sands production. Bloomberg reports on how the new regime plans to crack down on the industry:
> 
> ...


----------



## Edward Campbell (12 Jun 2015)

I'm not a great fan of Ezra levant, but I found this article, which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Financial Post_, interesting ... to say the least:

http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/ezra-levant-meet-albertas-new-chiefs-of-staff


> Meet Alberta’s new colonial chiefs
> 
> Ezra Levant, Special to Financial Post | June 12, 2015
> 
> ...




It is a thought provoking thesis, isn't it?


----------



## jollyjacktar (12 Jun 2015)

In my opinion, what the new alien overlords are going to do in the patch will make PET's National Energy Program's sucker punch look like a love tap.  They, are screwed.  Elizabeth May must be weeing herself at the possibilities of foxes in the hen house.


----------



## RedcapCrusader (12 Jun 2015)

It is going to be a very long, painful 4 years. Now I'm starting to think that the Left Wing's cleverly concocted false flag operation by planting an *unconfirmed* quote from PM Harper _"You won't recognize Canada when I'm through with it"_ was actually part of the Left Wing masterplan to destabilize and separate the west, creating the tree-hugging socialist utopia that they ambitiously dream of creating here in Canada.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Jun 2015)

>It is a thought provoking thesis, isn't it?

It's bloody disturbing.  I'd like to know (for comparison) whether it is a common practice for provincial governments to drag in out-of-province high political functionaries; but on the face of it, it stains the NDP deeply given all the crap they spout about fairness and self-determination and sinecures/senate appointments for political operatives and democracy and whatnot.

Imagine if the NDP had enough provincial strength in QC to win an election and pull that stunt - would they dare?  That thought experiment should tell any person all he needs to know about the integrity of the NDP.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (13 Jun 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >It is a thought provoking thesis, isn't it?
> 
> It's bloody disturbing.  I'd like to know (for comparison) whether it is a common practice for provincial governments to drag in out-of-province high political functionaries; but on the face of it, it stains the NDP deeply given all the crap they spout about fairness and self-determination and sinecures/senate appointments for political operatives and democracy and whatnot.
> 
> Imagine if the NDP had enough provincial strength in QC to win an election and pull that stunt - would they dare?  That thought experiment should tell any person all he needs to know about the integrity of the NDP.



I don't think the AB NDP will do anything radical until after the federal election in October. If they do something stupid before then, it could have a 
blowback effect on the federal NDP.


----------



## Kirkhill (13 Jun 2015)

http://socialistinternational.org/

Borders


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Jun 2015)

>I don't think the AB NDP will do anything radical until after the federal election in October.

If Levant's article in the FP is half-accurate, and if the practices described are not common among provincial governments, they already have.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (13 Jun 2015)

I suspect Rachel Notley is trying to run a one woman show.  People think Harper is a control freak, Notley is worse.

She only appointed 12 cabinet ministers, most with 2 portfolios.  She ended up with a lot of politically unsophisticated members lacking practical skills not unlike the NDP showing in Quebec last federal election.  She found only 11 others whom she could trust.  I'm sure the cabinet will double in size after a couple years as more peons gain her trust.

Out of the 12 chiefs of staff for cabinet members, 10 are from other provinces.  I think the problem was that it is hard to find radical committed Bolsheviks in Alberta that share Notley's philosophy.  Albertans might be tempted to place pragmatism over dogma and Notley couldn't have that.  The next government, in 4 years, is going to be faced with something that looks like clean-up shift at the slaughterhouse.


----------



## Edward Campbell (13 Jun 2015)

Rocky Mountains said:
			
		

> I suspect Rachel Notley is trying to run a one woman show.  People think Harper is a control freak, Notley is worse.
> 
> She only appointed 12 cabinet ministers, most with 2 portfolios.  She ended up with a lot of politically unsophisticated members lacking practical skills not unlike the NDP showing in Quebec last federal election.  She found only 11 others whom she could trust.  I'm sure the cabinet will double in size after a couple years as more peons gain her trust.
> 
> Out of the 12 chiefs of staff for cabinet members, 10 are from other provinces.  I think the problem was that it is hard to find radical committed Bolsheviks in Alberta that share Notley's philosophy.  Albertans might be tempted to place pragmatism over dogma and Notley couldn't have that.  The next government, in 4 years, is going to be faced with something that looks like clean-up shift at the slaughterhouse.




_I agree_ that the small cabinet is, _probably_, a direct result of the inexperience in her caucus. _I suspect_ you're right that the cabinet will grow; I don't disapprove of large cabinets ~ _cabinet making_ in Canada is a mixture of art and craft: getting the right regional, gender, ethnic and so on 'balances' just right to make something that works and is pleasing to the voters ~ but _I would like to see_ small, powerful "inner cabinets" balanced with larger numbers of "junior ministers" or secretaries of state of associate ministers or, or or ...

_I guess_ that the imported chiefs of staff are also a reflection of the inexperience level of her cabinet. _It seems_ (did I read it wrong?) that many (most?) of the _imports_ have some (political/governmental) _executive_ experience.


----------



## Rifleman62 (13 Jun 2015)

Those Chief of Staffs will not last long in AB.

If the low information, gimme votes of Canada elect a minority NDP Federal government they will move on to higher paying jobs in Ottawa, probably doubling their socialist salaries. Chauffeurs limos, vast expense accounts, flying everywhere in Challengers to environmental conferences, first class hotels, etc. What a life being a self important, pious socialist.


----------



## Underway (14 Jun 2015)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Those Chief of Staffs will not last long in AB.
> 
> If the low information, gimme votes of Canada elect a minority NDP Federal government they will move on to higher paying jobs in Ottawa, probably doubling their socialist salaries. Chauffeurs limos, vast expense accounts, flying everywhere in Challengers to environmental conferences, first class hotels, etc. What a life being a self important, pious socialist.



Low information...  gimme votes... You mean like the people who thought the GST cut was a good idea (all the informed people know that this is moronic, you cut income taxes not consumption taxes!!).  You know, the uneducated voters who work shiftwork at on rigs, or in mines, or for Magna who voted in the Conservatives federally.   All voters are gimme voters.  Unless they are partisan politicos.  Most voters run on the philosophy of "what have you done for me lately" or "who's gonna screw me over the least".  Most people who do vote, are low information _including_ those who are partisan (why bother to research if you are just going to vote for the Natural Law Party anyway).

And wasn't it the use of Chauffeured limos, vast expense accounts and flying everywhere on the gov't aircraft that started the end of the conservatives in AB in the first place?  And didn't they tell you that it was the voters that the conservatives were like that?

_...edited for recceguys ease of reading...._


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Jun 2015)

Underway said:
			
		

> Low information...  gimme votes... Oh you mean like the people who thought the GST cut was a good idea (good lord all the informed people know that this is moronic, you cut income taxes not consumption taxes!!).  You know the uneducated voters who work shiftwork at on rigs, or in mines, or for Magna who voted in the Conservatives federally.   All voters are gimme voters.  Unless they are partisan politicos.  Most voters run on the philosophy of "what have you done for me lately" or who's gonna screw me over the least.  Most ppl who do vote are low information _including_ especially those who are partisan (why bother to research if you are just going to vote for the Natural Law Party anyways).
> 
> Oh and wasn't it the use of Chauffeured limos, vast expense accounts and flying everywhere on the gov't aircraft that started the end of the conservatives in AB in the first place?  Oh and it was your fault voters that the conservatives were like that.



Some punctuation would make this easier to read.

Just a thought.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (14 Jun 2015)

Underway said:
			
		

> Oh and wasn't it the use of Chauffeured limos, vast expense accounts and flying everywhere on the gov't aircraft that started the end of the conservatives in AB in the first place?  Oh and it was your fault voters that the conservatives were like that.



This has been brought up before, but I would say that Alberta electing NDP was more related to the Wildrose and PC splitting the right wing vote vice the NDP garnering a majority of the voters (same as the CPC federally). Over 50% of Albertans voted for right wing parties after all


----------



## PuckChaser (14 Jun 2015)

I doubt the Tory and wildrose supporters are crying about changing proportional representation because the NDP didn't win the popular vote. Seems like a typical left wing ploy to change how the system works so they win.


----------



## daftandbarmy (14 Jun 2015)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> This has been brought up before, but I would say that Alberta electing NDP was more related to the Wildrose and PC splitting the right wing vote vice the NDP garnering a majority of the voters (same as the CPC federally). Over 50% of Albertans voted for right wing parties after all



You nailed it.

The race for the 'right to the right' totally forgot about the hard left hook. And they deserved to fail as a result, of course.


----------



## stealthylizard (15 Jun 2015)

It doesn't really matter what percentage of people voted for the right wing.  Our electoral system is not based on the popular vote.  

Why did 50% vote for the right wing parties?  Did they want 4 more years of PC entitlement, or 1 or 2 or 3 years because the fixed election dates sure didn't stop an early election - but math is hard, I forgive Prentice. What part of the Wildrose message did they like?  It surely wasn't evident in the debate - they had no message.  I like no more taxes too, but that isn't a good response about how to fund education in the face of a growing school population.  Did they vote for the right wing parties, or did they vote against the NDP?  

I can't believe I've actually sunk down to defending the NDP.  Rachel Notley came out with a strong campaign, and was solid in the debate.  She deserved to win.  I wait to see how she will govern.  Sure the NDP have screwed up in other provinces, but how well did the other parties in those provinces do?  Gordon Campbell wasn't great for BC, Christy Clark hasn't improved things.  Were things all hunky dory in Ontario under Mike Harris?  Saskatchewan is a mess of its own, even now with Brad Wall - their transportation infrastructure is horrendous, as one example.

I will wait to see how she governs before passing judgement.  For now, everyone else just sounds like sore losers.


----------



## PuckChaser (15 Jun 2015)

Ontario was excellent under Harris. Look at the absolute destruction of its economy under the Liberals.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (15 Jun 2015)

stealthylizard said:
			
		

> It doesn't really matter what percentage of people voted for the right wing.  Our electoral system is not based on the popular vote.
> 
> Why did 50% vote for the right wing parties?  Did they want 4 more years of PC entitlement, or 1 or 2 or 3 years because the fixed election dates sure didn't stop an early election - but math is hard, I forgive Prentice. What part of the Wildrose message did they like?  It surely wasn't evident in the debate - they had no message.  I like no more taxes too, but that isn't a good response about how to fund education in the face of a growing school population.  Did they vote for the right wing parties, or did they vote against the NDP?
> 
> ...



No sore loser here.... Simply pointing out that in the Cdn electoral system its rare that a governing party has a majority of the vote despite a majority of seats. So, had the right not been divided (as the left is federally) than the outcome might be different. 

Things in Ontario weren't all "hunky dory" under Mike Harris, but they were a heck of a lot better than the 4 years of Bob Rae.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (15 Jun 2015)

I was in Ontario for Bob Rae. It was a mess. I have been in BC for the NDP, too. Campbell and Clark were/are vast improvements.

I have also been in Saskatchewan under Brad Wall. Easily (far and away), the best provincial government I have ever seen, in terms of being professional and good with money.

Naturally, your mileage may vary.


----------



## Kirkhill (15 Jun 2015)

stealthylizard said:
			
		

> It doesn't really matter what percentage of people voted for the right wing.  Our electoral system is not based on the popular vote.
> 
> ....



There are no parties.  The Constitution doesn't recognize them.  There is no entitlement for parties.  

The current system permits the election of independents unaffiliated to any party and, in fact, is geared towards the unaffiliated member. Proportional Representation works against the Independent.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 Jun 2015)

I have to wonder if the recent number of Federal NDP bill supported by the CPC is an indicator that the CPC and NDP thinks the CPC may only win a minority government and the NDP is forming a relationship to get access to power if that happens. It makes sense in a way, neither the NDP or CPC will mistake the relationship as anything other than a relationship of convenience with clear positions for both parties, whereas a Liberal and NDP coalition will be a nasty mixed up mess with both parties claiming to be the idea maker and true governance, which will eventually confuse and annoy votes and party supporters alike. Possibly a early election as the fallout. The CPC-NDP alliance will be the CPC showing it can play well with others and the NDP showing that it is a grown up party that can checkmate the "worst of the Conservatives". The CPC retains power for another 4 years but at the whim of the NDP, who can use that time to show Canada that they are a "serious party".


----------



## Rocky Mountains (15 Jun 2015)

I suspect that should the Conservatives win a minority, it would be in the Liberal Party's best interest to support the Conservatives.  If the Liberals put the NDP in power, I suspect they would simply become irrelevant and disappear.  My guess is that the Liberals are a lot more like the Conservatives than they like to believe.  

Alberta Thread - sorry.


----------



## RedcapCrusader (15 Jun 2015)

The newly sworn Government of Alberta held their first Address to the Legislative Assembly today.

It was a sad sight.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (15 Jun 2015)

LunchMeat said:
			
		

> It was a sad sight.



Alberta's economy is in the crapper so they are raising corporate income taxes 12%.  I hope they weren't actually planning on collecting any more.  The PC's budget had a $5 billion deficit.  I wouldn't doubt the Bolsheviks manage $8 billion.

Actually I read it wrong - provincial corporate taxes are going from 10% to 12%, a 20 % increase.


----------



## Edward Campbell (25 Jun 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> This morning, on _CBC Radio's "The House"_ former Bank of Canada Governor David Dodge, one of the smartest men in Canada - head and shoulders smarter than any elected politician at any level, and smarter than 99% of the senior civil servants who advise all those politicians - will argue *for* more _Keynesian_ stimulus: but he will argue, very very specifically, for *infrastructure* spending: e.g. yes to Kathleen Wynne's plan to spend several billions on transit, for example, but no to additional social spending.
> 
> I'm not sure how he will come down on the Ontario premier's plan for an _Ontario Retirement Pension Plan_, which would be mandatory for those who don't already have a workplace plan. In fact I'm not exactly sure how I feel about it: I, generally, want to see people save more for their own retirement, but I think I would rather see enhancements to the RRSP system, including, *perhaps*, very small employer contributions (maybe something <0.5% of payroll under, say, $60,000.0) for employees who do not have pension plans but who do contribute to a RRSP. But I also think that the very best way to address the problems that Ontario, for example, faces, is to _grow_ the economy - which is why I know I will agree with David Dodge about some additional stimulus - stimulus focused, exclusively, on infrastructure, especially on maintenance of existing infrastructure but also on new public transit projects.
> 
> ...




And, given that Premier Rachel Notley has hired David Dodge to help her get Alberta back on track, David Parkinson suggests that AB is in for some long term debt financed infrastructure renewal in this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the _Globe and Mail_:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economic-insight/albertans-will-be-forced-to-face-debt-with-david-dodge/article25100695/


> Albertans will be forced to face debt with David Dodge
> 
> SUBSCRIBERS ONLY
> 
> ...




My _fear_, for Alberta, is that Premier Notley's party will want to borrow and spend on social programmes, which are extremely unproductive, even counterproductive, rather than on infrastructure renewal, which is very productive and should last as long as the term on the bonds used to finance it.

Debt is not bad ... in fact the very notion of "public debt" is what, more than any war or philosophy, created the modern world.


----------



## a_majoor (25 Jun 2015)

I am going to come out "against" this for the simple reason that politicans and bureaucrats are weasles and will contort the spirit and the letter of any plan so long as it aggregates more power and influence to them.

Once this plan is "blessed"; look for hocky arenas, performing arts centers, convention centers, "public art" sculptures and a whole host of "other" projects to magically turn into "infrastructure" to get funding. Evne real infrastructure like roads,bridges, water and sewer pipes etc. will be directed to where the (NDP) voters are, so it will suck to be an Albertan living outside of Edmonton and Calgary.

The vast majority of these projects will have 0 or negative impact on GDP growth, and the debt overhang will pull the rest of the economy down with it (does no one at all remember the Great Depression or the financial crisis of 2008?). Public debt is only good so far as we can trust politicians and bureaucrats to spend it on real infrastructure, not disguised social spending and vote getting (and the answer to that is "not at all").

No, this is just a cover for doing what they want to do anyway.


----------



## Clerk Wannabe (25 Jun 2015)

I think it's a good idea as far as diversifying where Alberta gets the money for infrastructure so that if oil prices dip, it won't be affected or at least ass affected. 

I don't think it will turn out that way as once a money faucet is open for the government, they tend to flood the bathroom.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jun 2015)

The comments about a reduction in labour and contracting costs due to the downturn, echo what the mayor of Fort Mac said. They are looking at catching up on infrastructure issues. Building large infrastructure project with long payoff times is what government does best. Good roads, bridges, transmission lines and even helping with rail lines pays off down the road. I can imagine how the BC NW would look like had WAC Bennett completed his rail line up to Dease lake.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (25 Jun 2015)

Any discussion of government debt in Alberta is pointless because Alberta has an embarrassment of revenue.  It has just been so badly managed.  Ralph Klein balanced the budget when oil varied from $10-$30 per barrel.  Without even looking at efficiencies, Alberta overpays its employees by over 20 %.  They signed a lot of long-term sweetheart deals with unions just before elections to have labour peace.  And now we elect a government that actually owes the unions for support.


----------



## Edward Campbell (25 Jun 2015)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> I am going to come out "against" this for the simple reason that politicans and bureaucrats are weasles and will contort the spirit and the letter of any plan so long as it aggregates more power and influence to them.
> 
> Once this plan is "blessed"; look for hocky arenas, performing arts centers, convention centers, "public art" sculptures and a whole host of "other" projects to magically turn into "infrastructure" to get funding. Evne _real infrastructure like roads,bridges, water and sewer pipes etc_. will be directed to where the (NDP) voters are, so it will suck to be an Albertan living outside of Edmonton and Calgary.
> 
> ...




_I think_ there is ample evidence in the literature to suggest that a programme of steady, constant maintenance and renewal/replacement of "real infrastructure" is good for the economy and, always, money well spent. The problem, in most of North America, is that politicians build shiny new infrastructure and then skimp on the regular, steady, ongoing repair and maintenance ... until there is some sort of crisis.

          <rant> But the problem isn't the politicians, much less the bureaucrats, it is the _icredibly f'ing stupid people_ who are allowed to vote and elect the politicians who, then,
                     do as the _incredibly f'ing stupid people_ want ... </rant>


----------



## KJK (25 Jun 2015)

You mean like when the City of Edmonton takes 25 million from its paving budget over 5 years because there is no money but builds a 500 million dollar arena?

KJK


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jun 2015)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> _I think_ there is ample evidence in the literature to suggest that a programme of steady, constant maintenance and renewal/replacement of "real infrastructure" is good for the economy and, always, money well spent. The problem, in most of North America, is that politicians build shiny new infrastructure and then skimp on the regular, steady, ongoing repair and maintenance ... until there is some sort of crisis.
> 
> <rant> But the problem isn't the politicians, much less the bureaucrats, it is the _icredibly f'ing stupid people_ who are allowed to vote and elect the politicians who, then,
> do as the _incredibly f'ing stupid people_ want ... </rant>



At lot of bureaucrats at the front end are always pointing out the unsexy stuff. As the saying goes in infrastructure; if you do your job well, nobody will notice"


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Jun 2015)

I haven't been into AB for a long while, but I never thought of it as a province full of rotting infrastructure.  I'll be completely cynical, and assert that Dodge's (or rather, Dodge's credibility's) function is to be a smokescreen/squirrel: he and his efforts will be what the government points to whenever spending questions arise.

Planning infrastructure maintenance doesn't need outside consultants: the cities are full of civil engineers, including many on public payrolls.  Likewise, existing planners and engineers are more than capable of predicting where new infrastructure is most likely to be well-placed.  However, their recommendations won't fit a political template; hence, outside consulting.

People assume "infrastructure" means "useful" and "investment".  Infrastructure spending can also be misallocation of capital, which leaves you paying to maintain something you don't need or don't use.


----------



## Edward Campbell (26 Jun 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> I haven't been into AB for a long while, but I never thought of it as a province full of rotting infrastructure.  I'll be completely cynical, and assert that Dodge's (or rather, Dodge's credibility's) function is to be a smokescreen/squirrel: he and his efforts will be what the government points to whenever spending questions arise.
> 
> Planning infrastructure maintenance doesn't need outside consultants: the cities are full of civil engineers, including many on public payrolls.  Likewise, existing planners and engineers are more than capable of predicting where new infrastructure is most likely to be well-placed.  However, their recommendations won't fit a political template; hence, outside consulting.
> 
> People assume "infrastructure" means "useful" and "investment".  Infrastructure spending can also be misallocation of capital, which_ leaves you paying to maintain something you don't need or don't use_.




Yep ...


----------



## Underway (26 Jun 2015)

You can always invest in infrastructure.  Fix up and repair bridges ahead of schedule, repave roads, pave some roads that are gravel.  Invest in bike lanes, improved sewers, public transit, parks, medical centres etc...



			
				Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> People assume "infrastructure" means "useful" and "investment".  Infrastructure spending can also be misallocation of capital, which leaves you paying to maintain something you don't need or don't use.



Completely agree.  Arena's and sports facilities top my list of worst "infrastructure" investments ever.  Community centres and the like are important but should not take away from infrastructure spending that benifits everyone and improves the economy or health of an area.  Even libraries (though I think they are more valuable than arena's) are not proper infrastructure spending.


----------



## Brasidas (26 Jun 2015)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> I haven't been into AB for a long while, but I never thought of it as a province full of rotting infrastructure.  I'll be completely cynical, and assert that Dodge's (or rather, Dodge's credibility's) function is to be a smokescreen/squirrel: he and his efforts will be what the government points to whenever spending questions arise.
> 
> Planning infrastructure maintenance doesn't need outside consultants: the cities are full of civil engineers, including many on public payrolls.  Likewise, existing planners and engineers are more than capable of predicting where new infrastructure is most likely to be well-placed.  However, their recommendations won't fit a political template; hence, outside consulting.
> 
> People assume "infrastructure" means "useful" and "investment".  Infrastructure spending can also be misallocation of capital, which leaves you paying to maintain something you don't need or don't use.



Alberta has a cyclical economy. At high points, the cost of building infrastructure becomes ridiculously high, and it makes sense to defer it. There are many unsexy projects that it would make sense to fund and ramp up right now. One more notable one might be the twinning of highway 63, but there are other roadwork, schools, and other facilities that would be cheaper now than later.

I absolutely agree on the Edmonton arena, and its not a time to waste money, but there are plenty of projects that were paid for at inflated prices at high times, and more that weren't paid for because the price was inflated. Now's the time, rather than when they cost too much again.

Depending on how much it costs to do so, in comparison to the waste that not planning might entail, I'd say it could be worth investing in an analysis and a framework for funding infrastructure projects in a cyclical economy. As opposed to mayors lobbying for pet projects in real time.


----------



## cupper (26 Jun 2015)

Brasidas said:
			
		

> Alberta has a cyclical economy. At high points, the cost of building infrastructure becomes ridiculously high, and it makes sense to defer it. There are many unsexy projects that it would make sense to fund and ramp up right now. One more notable one might be the twinning of highway 63, but there are other roadwork, schools, and other facilities that would be cheaper now than later.
> 
> I absolutely agree on the Edmonton arena, and its not a time to waste money, but there are plenty of projects that were paid for at inflated prices at high times, and more that weren't paid for because the price was inflated. Now's the time, rather than when they cost too much again.
> 
> Depending on how much it costs to do so, in comparison to the waste that not planning might entail, I'd say it could be worth investing in an analysis and a framework for funding infrastructure projects in a cyclical economy. As opposed to mayors lobbying for pet projects in real time.



A couple of points I disagree with. 

Deferred maintenance or improvements will never be cheaper in the future than it is to do it in the present. It's a basic time-value of money argument at its most basic. But further to that, what is only a minor issue at the current time will become a larger, more expensive problem as the infrastructure continues to deteriorate. The problem is that when you face a situation of government belt tightening, infrastructure spending decisions get reduced to a triage methodology, where money is directed to the worst case items which cannot be deferred any longer. Unfortunately the money never comes back when the economy improves, and deferrable projects continue to be put off until they can no longer be ignored.

Also, high and low cycles in the economy don't necessarily translate into the same high / low cycle in construction costs. In this case lower petroleum costs mean a downturn a petroleum based economy, but it also means lower construction costs, particularly in highway construction. Fuel costs for heavy equipment drop, prices for asphalt and certain construction materials drop.


----------



## YZT580 (26 Jun 2015)

what effect will the new carbon tax have on any recovery?


----------



## Brasidas (27 Jun 2015)

cupper said:
			
		

> A couple of points I disagree with.
> 
> Deferred maintenance or improvements will never be cheaper in the future than it is to do it in the present. It's a basic time-value of money argument at its most basic. But further to that, what is only a minor issue at the current time will become a larger, more expensive problem as the infrastructure continues to deteriorate. The problem is that when you face a situation of government belt tightening, infrastructure spending decisions get reduced to a triage methodology, where money is directed to the worst case items which cannot be deferred any longer. Unfortunately the money never comes back when the economy improves, and deferrable projects continue to be put off until they can no longer be ignored.
> 
> Also, high and low cycles in the economy don't necessarily translate into the same high / low cycle in construction costs. In this case lower petroleum costs mean a downturn a petroleum based economy, but it also means lower construction costs, particularly in highway construction. Fuel costs for heavy equipment drop, prices for asphalt and certain construction materials drop.



I don't think I disagree with you very much. 

Deferring maintenance for the sake of saying "we don't have a deficit" or "look at me, I paid off the debt" is stupid. Having a plan for infrastructure spending in the long term is the smart way to go. Making late, costly triage decisions at the top of an economic cycle does directly lead higher construction costs - whereas having planned spending with long-agreed contracts keeps it down and manageable. During a low-point, front-loading some priority improvements when costs are lower makes sense, but it should be done within the context of a plan.

Deferring maintenance and paying a higher cost in the end is not a sound plan. Deferring a proposal for the twinning of a given stretch of highway, when the construction industry is so overheated that it's impractical isn't the same thing.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (27 Jun 2015)

To defer maintenance on infrastructure for any reason is always bad policy. Central Canada is paying for that right now (Tried to get around Montreal or Toronto in summer lately?).

However, in a boom and bust economy, it is perfectly acceptable to defer the construction of supplementary or new infrastructure to the bust periods in order to keep the boom going. For instance, adding a third lane to a two lane highway will reduce its usage for a while (maybe down to one lane or greatly slowed down lanes with traffic back ups during construction. During a boom this is a hindrance and if you know the B/B cycle to be about 10-15 years, then you can defer safely and reduce irritants to the economy in boom times. Acting this way is also quite correctly keynesian.

The question is should this be financed through deficits? My personal answer, and the likely correct Keynesian answer is: No. During the boom times, a portion of the extra revenue should be siphoned off and set aside for the infrastructure spending that you know will be required in bust times. This way you don't get into deficit, unless you made some minor miscalculations and then you can go into a small deficit to be paid off in the beginning of the next cycle.


----------



## daftandbarmy (28 Jun 2015)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> what effect will the new carbon tax have on any recovery?



Probably less than the PST they will introduce next year


----------



## Colin Parkinson (29 Jun 2015)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> To defer maintenance on infrastructure for any reason is always bad policy. Central Canada is paying for that right now (Tried to get around Montreal or Toronto in summer lately?).
> 
> However, in a boom and bust economy, it is perfectly acceptable to defer the construction of supplementary or new infrastructure to the bust periods in order to keep the boom going. For instance, adding a third lane to a two lane highway will reduce its usage for a while (maybe down to one lane or greatly slowed down lanes with traffic back ups during construction. During a boom this is a hindrance and if you know the B/B cycle to be about 10-15 years, then you can defer safely and reduce irritants to the economy in boom times. Acting this way is also quite correctly keynesian.
> 
> The question is should this be financed through deficits? My personal answer, and the likely correct Keynesian answer is: No. During the boom times, a portion of the extra revenue should be siphoned off and set aside for the infrastructure spending that you know will be required in bust times. This way you don't get into deficit, unless you made some minor miscalculations and then you can go into a small deficit to be paid off in the beginning of the next cycle.



The sanity is strong in this one  8)


----------



## Brad Sallows (29 Jun 2015)

Deferring maintenance risks eventual higher costs; doing maintenance early is an inefficient use of funds.  Maintenance should be planned and programmed and done when it is due.

Stockpiling funds in advance is prudent but politically impractical (nigh impossible).  Governing parties change, and someone will always want to raid the kitty.

I harbour a suspicion that the worst friction in the system is the preference of politicians to be conspicuously seen spending money on new toys rather than off voters radar, quietly and competently looking after existing ones.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (30 Jun 2015)

A big problem in countries like Malaysia, build big and new, forget about what has been built and needs repair. They really need to take kids out to look at streetworks and explain all the underground infrastructure. I did for my kids so they know where and how the water comes from and the where and how the poop goes. I suspect they are the only ones in their class that do know. We don't educate our kids on the fundamental building blocks of society and wonder why they get tricked to vote for Fluffy the talking hairdo.


----------



## Edward Campbell (28 Nov 2015)

Apparently, this ...

                   
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




                      ... is Alberta Premier Rachel Notley's long term fiscal plan.  :nod:


----------



## KJK (28 Nov 2015)

ERC, if that is her long term plan I don't see it coming to fruition. She has done her best to chase all investment from the province. Even if oil were to rise back to $100 I don't really see much happening in such a hostile political environment. And this without weighing what might come out of the royalty review. I don't see much hope for the future while the NDP are in power in AB and shiny pony is in power in Ottawa.


----------

