• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Alberta Election (2015)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Edward Campbell

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
4,320
Points
1,160
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/
gam-masthead.png

Premier Prentice is pulling off a most Canadian coup

TOM FLANAGAN
Special to The Globe and Mail

Last updated Saturday, Mar. 07 2015

“If you will the end, you must will the means.” Prime Minister Francis Urquhart, House of Cards (original British version)

Alberta politics looks like a replay of 1993, when premier Ralph Klein attacked the provincial budget deficit with an austerity program. In an economic sense, the challenge Premier Jim Prentice faces is easier than the one that confronted Mr. Klein. The 1993 deficit was larger in relative terms than today’s deficit, the province had slipped into net debt, and interest payments were a higher proportion of the budget than they are now. Consequently, the reductions to the operating budget foreshadowed by Mr. Prentice – 5 per cent in nominal terms, 9 per cent in real terms – are smaller than the swingeing cuts enforced by Mr. Klein.

But if the economics are better for Mr. Prentice, some other factors are less favourable. The courts have revised the law of labour relations since 1993, making it impossible for the government to override existing collective agreements and impose salary reductions as Mr. Klein did. Now a government has to wait for a collective agreement to expire before seeking revision of the salary structure. Many existing contracts will extend for another year or two, increasing the inertia in the provincial budget. Immediate cuts will affect the volume of public services delivered more than the compensation of those who deliver them.

Also, the timing is more difficult for Mr. Prentice than for Mr. Klein. The latter won the Progressive Conservative leadership race in 1992, and a general election in 1993, by promising to deal with the fiscal emergency. Thus he could proceed in 1993 with a full term of office to achieve results. Albertans liked what they saw – once they got over the initial shock of austerity – and re-elected Mr. Klein with an increased majority in 1997.

Mr. Prentice, in contrast, did not run for the PC leadership on an austerity platform, and he became premier with only a year left until the next election, which under Alberta’s semi-fixed election legislation should take place in spring, 2016. One year is not nearly enough time for an austerity program to show positive results, particularly in the new legal environment of collective bargaining. Economic conditions will probably seem worse in early 2016 than they are now, with an increase in unemployment, a decline in investment, reductions in public services, and a balanced budget not yet in sight.

Mr. Prentice’s solution to this conundrum has been a masterpiece of political strategy. He weakened his main opposition by inducing Wildrose leader Danielle Smith and most of her caucus to join the PCs. Now he is hinting broadly that he will call an election this spring, a year earlier than prescribed by legislation, claiming that his austerity program will require a new mandate.

This is the most striking strategic coup in Canadian politics since Conservative prime minister Robert Borden won re-election in the midst of the First World War. Borden changed the electoral law to disenfranchise conscientious objectors while facilitating votes from servicemen and their wives; postponed the election for two years, from 1915 to 1917; and split the opposition by inducing many Liberal caucus members to join his Unionist cabinet and caucus. Mr. Prentice hasn’t changed eligibility requirements for voting, but otherwise he seems to be emulating Borden by manipulating the election date and splitting the opposition.

Mr. Prentice served for four years in Stephen Harper’s federal cabinet. Mr. Harper, of course, is widely regarded as a Machiavellian strategist, the master of hardball politics; while Mr. Prentice was seen as a natural conciliator, a soft-hearted Red Tory. Ironically, Mr. Prentice is now executing a Machiavellian political strategy that matches anything Mr. Harper has ever done.

Such tough-minded resolve is essential for any head of government who wants to see an austerity program through to the end. Once you start giving in to the special pleading of aggrieved interest groups, it’s all over. Mr. Prentice’s approach may be a signal that, like Margaret Thatcher, he is “not for turning.”

Tom Flanagan is a professor emeritus of political science and a distinguished fellow in the School of Public Policy, University of Calgary. He is a former campaign manager for conservative parties.


What do Albertans think?
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
The only real solution for Alberta is to introduce the PST.

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

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.


And that could for the base for a successful campaign:

    1. Remember the three envelopes joke?

       
f1e1cbc741f9afcb1df8c2f89c2ab3ed.png


        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:

       
6a00d83451688169e201a511761fd3970c-750wi

        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.


       
6a00d83451688169e201a73d81591e970d-750wi

        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 ...

         
denis-healey-first-law-on-holes-when-youre-in-one-stop.jpg
 
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 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/



 
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.

 
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. 
 
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:

CA3iZIJUYAAJc-Q.jpg


... 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.
 
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
 
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:


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

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


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

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.
 
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?)
 
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.
 
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
 
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.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top