Albertans looking at $2 billion in spending cuts and (wait for it) tax increases.

I love the euphemism "fiscal correction":

"Finance Minister Iris Evans had said the province would have to find $2 billion in revenues or savings if the economy didn't perform better then expected, but it now appears that cuts and tax hikes or some combination of the two are a certainty…. The governing Tories have already forecast a record $4.7-billion deficit, which would escalate to $6.7 billion if the $2 billion is not found, but the document suggests the province could plunge even deeper into the red if the price of natural gas--forecast in the budget at $5.50 per gigajoule but currently selling at $3.75 --doesn't rebound."

I’m sorry, but if I ever hear someone parrot some line about “Tax and Spend Liberals” or that the Conservatives are the party of sound fiscal planning; that never raises taxes and keeps balanced budgets, I may just have an aneurysm.

I’m just saying….

Google News Search Results for the Past Day:

“Michael Jackson”: 104,281 results

“Iraq”: 77,781 results

"Iran" and "protest": 46,351 results

“Darfur”: 5,301 results

….hey, I liked “Thriller” as much as the next guy….

The George W. Bush of the Middle East

In response to international condemnation of Iran’s crackdown on pro-democracy protestors, Iranian crackpot Ahmadinejad has thrown something of a “Hail Mary”, comparing President Obama to ‘Dubya, and claiming that supporters of Mousavi have been manipulated by the Evil Western Empires.

To his credit, Obama appears to have done a fairly good job in resisting the calls of hawkish members of congress to become more involved in the Iranian protests, recognizing the negative impact American intervention has had in Iranian politics. Overt support of one side may do more harm than good. The best analogy I’ve heard so far would be if Hubert Humphrey had won the 1968 Presidential election – only to have it later revealed that the Soviets had sponsored his campaign.

The irony in Ahmadinejad’s invocation of the name of Bush is that if there is anyone who resembles the former US President in action, it’s himself. Both have sought to label opposition as unpatriotic, and both have invoked a foreign boogieman (terrorism in Bush’s case, the US/UK in Ahmadinejad’s) to keep their people in line.


Side note to Hugo Chavez: "The Enemy of my Enemy is my friend" is a rather poor way to determine foreign policy.

Stupid MLA comments shouldn’t discourage MLAs/MPs from using the Internet to engage citizens.

In 2004, a member of the University of Alberta Students’ Union’s Students’ Council got himself into some hot water after posting a song parody on his personal blog glorifying date-rape. A constituent of his followed a link from an SU webpage, was horrified by the councilor’s “sense of humour”, and wrote to the campus paper to bring the matter to their attention. A month later, the councilor had resigned in disgrace.

The lesson this individual, much like Albertan MLA Doug Elniski, learned much to late was that one should not post something online that one wouldn’t say in a press gallery in front of a dozen cameras.

Elniski’s tasteless Twitter comments, such as telling Albertan Women “don't give me that 'treated equal' stuff. If you want Equal, it comes in little packages at Starbucks”, or commenting “i am surrounded by bumping and grinding lesbians waiit 20 then send help” during Edmonton’s Pride parade are just the latest in a string of comments that have caused no shortage of embarrassment for many Albertans. They will likely not be the last ones either. Technologies such as Blackberries combined with Twitter and Facebook mean that thoughts can be posted before one’s self-censoring mechanism kicks in.

While Mr. Elniski’s comments are mind bogglingly stupid, it would be a shame if the take away message for elected representatives became “don’t use twitter/blogs/Facebook”. Speaking to a former NDP MP candidate last fall, I was told blogging made her nervous as you never know when online comments can come back to haunt you (a la Malcolm Azania). The loss is ours as there is one less intelligent voice participating in the exchange of ideas, and one less person willing to engage the public without the filter of party speechwriters.

As for Doug Elniski and Iris Evens, I doubt either will face much in the way of political blowback from their recent foot-in-mouth events. However if members of the government could stop making similar comments for just a little while, it would go a long way in helping me in arguing to my co-workers that my home province isn't stuck in the 1890s, despite suggestions to the contrary.

If pushed, would Canadians fight for their rights with the same zeal as the Iranians are?

During the media storm that surrounded the recent confrontation between the government and the opposition, the line I heard the most (often uttered by the PM) was “Canadian’s don’t want a summer election”.

Looking back to 2006, I’m pretty sure I heard similar lines about a “Christmas election”. I’m sure if asked, people would say that Canadians don’t want a Labour Day election. Or an Easter election. Or an Arbor Day election.

I really don’t understand what the big deal would be. Aside from a few election signs on the way to the summer cabin, or the odd campaign ad distracting from keeping up to date with whatever is going on with John and Kate, I doubt most Canadians would even notice something was going on. Given the trend in voting over the past decade, Canadians have shown an ever-decreasing rate of interest in the democratic process.

Contrast our democratic malaise with what’s going on in Iran, where people are turning out en mass, and in some cases dying, to demand their right to fair and democratic elections.

There are times when I think Canadians take free and fair elections for granted.

Would we fight for our institutions with the same zeal?

Why wait until the system is that damaged?

Why does Alberta have a prominent geographical feature named after a Nazi collaborator?

It’s just past midnight on Friday, and being struck with insomnia, I figured blogging was as good of a way to pass the time as any other option available to me.

But what to write about?

I’ve shied away from writing about the situation in Iran simply because I don’t feel I have anything new and intelligent to add to the discussion at this time, and enlightenment sure as hell isn’t coming at 12:16 on a Friday night.

So instead I’ll ask a question that has zero impact on the way anyone anywhere lives their lives.

“Why does Alberta have a prominent geographical feature named after a Nazi collaborator?”

For those unfamiliar with the region, the area around the Kananaskis Lakes (not a particularly remote area) in Alberta have a number of mountains bearing names of people or things associated with World War 1. In addition to Pétain, Generals Foch, Joffre, and Haig all have mountains named after them, as do most of the major British ships that participated in the Battle of Jutland, for some reason. Most of these features were named during or immediately after the war, when Canadian national identity was still firmly fixed to that of the British Empire. I guess we just didn't have enough history to pull names from.

While Haig’s handling of the Battles at the Somme and Passchendaele make it debatable whether he’s worthy of the honour of having a mountain named after him, Pétain’s name remains firmly associated with treason, and thus the jury is surely in.

So why does Pétain, almost 70 years after the birth of the Vichy regime, still have his name plastered across topographical maps of my home province?

Tiller Assassination and The Media: When does freedom of speech cross over to crimes against humanity?

In the wake of the terrorist attack on/assassination of/murder of Dr. George Tiller and the shootings at the Holocaust Museum in Washington DC, much light has been shed on the comments of certain ultra-conservative groups and commentators over recent years. The point of contention, it appears, is to what extent does (or should) free speech exist in our society, and how much responsibility do these commentators bear for the actions of people who take the final step of matching their words to horrific events? It is a question that I admit I don’t have a clear answer to, but hope that writing about it will help clarify my thoughts somewhat, for my own benefit if nothing else.

Overall, I tend to be on the more liberal side of freedom of speech, believing that the price of living in a free society is occasionally putting up with the ramblings of intolerant lunatics. Just as they are free to say pretty much whatever they want, I am free to ignore them. Besides, it’ll often give me something to write about on a slow news day.

However there have definitely been instances where a line has been crossed and individuals or organizations have abused freedom of speech to incite violence against others, with tragic consequences. In our own past – at Nuremburg and the ICTR, we have prosecuted members of the press who egged on the slaughter during the Holocaust and Rwandan Genocide. So to what extent do these people bear a measure of responsibility for the actions of their followers? While I’m not comparing Fox News to RTLM, you have to think that if you have people going on the air saying stuff like “Tiller the Baby Killer” over and over again (completely ignoring the fact that the man is performing a procedure fully compliant with local laws) some nut job is eventually going to take you seriously.

So where is the legal line in the massive grey area between an off colour joke told at a party and a station like Radio-Télévision Libre des Milles-Collines? Does it matter if the statements are made in private groups, or broadcast to a potential audience of millions? After all this, I’m still not sure.

Climate change can cause severe financial woes… Even for Alberta

Alberta’s attempts to cut spending this year in order to deal with the reality of deficits are being hampered by, of all things, the weather. The province is suffering what could be the driest year in the past 25, or at the least the 2nd driest. As a result of this, the province will have to shell out more money than expected to bail out its farmers and fight a larger number of forest fires.

Now while this year’s water problems in Wild Rose Country can’t be uniquely attributed to changing climate patterns, it’s worth noting that these problems with water availability are exactly the type that can be expected if current predictions hold true. If modeled temperatures are correct, we could see a 2 degree increase from 1980’s mean annual temperature by 2030, an 5 degrees by 2070 (according to the UofA’s Environmental Research and Studies Centre).

So what does that mean? A 2-4 degree increase would have the affect of shifting the climate near Lethbridge north to areas like Calgary or Red Deer. A 3-5 degree increase shifts Calgary’s climate to High Level – a 14 hour drive to the north.


I wonder what the fires and droughts would be like then.

Results of Nova Scotian election should cause concern for Canadians of all political stripes.

Aside from the Orange Tsunami, there was another story from the June 9th election in Nova Scotia; one that should cause concern for Canadians, regardless of political beliefs.

The turnout for Tuesday’s vote hit a provincial low of 58.8%. The October Federal election saw a turnout of 59.1%, another historic low. Alberta’s 2008-election saw turnout plummet to 41%, again historic lows. These abysmal turnouts ask the question: how can a government claim legitimacy when half of its citizens don’t participate in the process used to select it. How low must turnouts fall before governments take the lack of participation seriously?

So why are so few people participating in the democratic process? Any answer from me would only be a guess, but I assume the problem is systematic within our institutions. Aside from increasing the eligible voter pool to include previously disenfranchised groups, has our democratic system really changed all that much since confederation? We use the same voting system to send our representatives off to a (sometimes) far away capital, only to have them return to their constituencies to participate in the mandatory BBQ circuit. While email may have replaced the letter as a primary mode of communication between citizen and representative, individual communication often remains a one-way street.

I’m interested what people think the answers will be, but I suspect any real solution will be substantially more complex than “implement PR” or “more civics classes for kids”.

If our elected leaders are seriously concerned about the health of our democracy, they should work together across jurisdictional and party lines to study the issue, ask people why they don’t vote, and propose a comprehensive package designed to increase confidence in our democratic institutions.

Nova Scotia Votes 2009: SOCIALISM! GULAGS! DOOOOOOM!

One day after the Orange Tsunami swept across Nova Scotia, the province has yet to sink into the chilly waters of the North Atlantic, the NKVD has yet to come knocking at my door, private businesses still exist, and there are as of yet no mandatory bongo lessons.

While I’m pleased that Rodney “lock up those crazy kids” MacDonald got the boot he so rightfully deserved last night, I’ll reserve judgment on my new socialist overlords until a later date. While Dexter’s moderation of the Nova Scotia NDP means their overall ideology likely resembles my own, I stand by my earlier statement that a large part of their agenda remains a question mark, due to the relatively lackluster policy document they released.

If Dexter wants to work his way into my good books quickly, lighting a fairly large bonfire under the collective behinds of Halifax Regional Municipal Council would be a good place to start. Halifax has been dumping raw sewage into the Harbour since one of the local treatment plants failed back in January, causing the city to become a national embarrassment. The weather out here is warming up, and I would like to take a walk along the boardwalk sometime soon without seeing “floatables” bobbing along between the jellyfish.

Initial thoughts on the isotope explosion, and the "Perez Hilton.com of Canadian Politican News"

I’ll be honest; I’ve only paid scant attention to the massive blogging explosion thats gone on recently over the story of Lisa Raitt’s little “cancer is sexy” faux-pas and the story leading up to it. Why not? Because in the grand scheme of things it doesn’t really affect how our country is being run. Sure, it reflects poorly on the professionalism the political staff surrounding the Natural Resources minister, and on the same minister for letting her staff take the fall for her, but in the long run government policy isn’t really being affected, is it? At least not yet.

No doubt both Raitt and her aid are reaping what they sewed here. By going through the courts to try and block the tape, they created so much more hype surrounding its possible contents than if they just let it go, and took their knocks as they came. Add on to this Raitt’s lame attempt at deflecting criticism over her managing of the isotope crisis by attacking how long Ignatieff’s been in the country, and I’ll admit that a twisted part of me is enjoying watching this blow up in her face.

However, compared to say the repeal of the faint hope clause, or mandatory minimum sentences on drug crimes, this really isn’t that important in the grand scheme of things. No one’s lives are going to be dramatically altered because Raitt lacks confidence in Health Minister Aglukkaq.

So why is everyone talking about it? It’s gossip, and not a little bit of schadenfreude. It’s a sordid look at the inner workings of a notoriously secretive and tight-lipped political party.

This is the PerezHilton.com of Canadian political news.

For Nova Scotian NDP supporters: The Party, or the Policy?

With the Nova Scotian NDP polling in majority territory, the party’s supporters are ecstatic at the prospect that their party, long on the outside of the provincial halls of government, may now have their hand on the reins of "Canada's Ocean Playground".

However, despite their success so far, supporters of the NDP should pause for a moment and ask themselves what’s more important: The Party or The Policy?

Before any NDP fans start assuming I’m trumpeting the same “risky NDP” line the Tories have been trumpeting this whole election, my problem with the NDP isn’t that they’re “too left”, it’s that they’re “not left enough”, or more appropriately, they have shown a lack of vision with respect to most policy areas their party has traditionally supported.

Dexter and the NDP have been called out by media outlets from the Globe and Mail, the Chronicle Herald, and even Halifax’s independent weekly “The Coast” as having moderated substantially from other incarnations of the party. Darrel Dexter is no Jack Layton, nor (for the benefit of my Albertan leaders) is he Brian Mason. He is, as he describes himself in a recent Coast article, a “conservative progressive”.

It’s a description that’s apt. The NDP’s platform is cautious, with both the Canadian Federation of Students and the Alliance of Nova Scotia Student Associations calling out the NDP over the lack of a post-secondary education vision. With the abandoning of what is often a core platform plank of the NDP, Mr. Dexter and his supporters are left with something of a Catch-22 if they form the next government on June 9th.

If the NDP adopt an expanded policy agenda beyond the pamphlet that their team released, you can bet that there will be talk of a “hidden agenda” next election, and accusations that the government doesn’t have a mandate to enact different a broad range of different policies, as they didn’t present them to the electorate.

However if this more “electable” version of the NDP continues along the more moderate path, then what becomes of the traditional “base” of the party, who will no doubt feel that they were sold out for a chance at the Premier’s office? If the Greens ever get their act together, the NDP could find themselves outflanked by a reasonable alternative on the left on issues like the environment – the Liberals already have them on education.

So to those excited about the prospect of an NDP government in Nova Scotia, the question is, what’s more important? The party, or the policy?

Why Alberta’s Bill 44 represents a blow for Albertan Democracy

Both Daveberta and Ken Chapman have brought up the possibility that Bill 44 could be some sort of game-changer in Alberta politics. With Web 2.0 technologies like twitter being used to debate legislation with the MLAs sitting on the floor of the leg, the hope is (I assume) that the controversy over the legislation will galvanize people to take a more active role in provincial politics. Sadly, I’m not holding my breath.

Dave brings up the Bill 11 debate over Privatized Health Care from 2000, an event that played a strong role in shaping my future involvement in politics as well. It took 70 days, from March 2nd to May 10th of 2000, for Bill 11 to go from first reading to third. In the meantime, groups like Friends of Medicare sent out fliers, the Raging Grannies sang on the steps of the leg, and Jack Bauer himself came out, waving his Canadian passport, to protect his grandfather’s legacy.

Even the Tories got involved in the debate, sending out fliers to Albertans telling us what a good idea Bill 11 was. Dave Hancock even dropped by my High School as part of a forum to debate the issue, giving the High-School version of myself the option to ask a somewhat pointed question about why was the government spending all sorts of money trying to promote Ralph’s “Third Way” through mailouts, rather than (say) fixing the public system.

Bill 44 is not Bill 11. It’s worse. Bill 44 went from 1st reading to 3rd in just 36 days.

Ed has learned from Ralph’s mistake. He saw first hand with the “no plan” ads what can happen when Alberta’s left is given time to get mobilized. Unlike in 2000, the Tories now try to ram legislation through as quickly as possible before the spotlight can be shone on the province, and before the opposition or civic organizations can mount an effective campaign.

Paula Simons hit the nail on the head in her column in the Journal today. The Tories know they have an overwhelming majority, and as long as they can keep the opposition divided and playing catch-up, it’s going to stay that way.

Tiananmen +20: So how do we deal with China today?

Today, as no doubt anyone not living behind the great firewall is aware, is the 20th anniversary of one of the landmark events of the past century – the Tiananmen Square Massacre; an event which the Chinese government is determined to erase from history. For our part, western countries seem OK with this, considering how we awarded the country last summer’s Olympics, and did our best to look the other way whenever someone mentioned the topic of "human rights".

What we are now left with is a question: How do we deal with China? Their record towards human rights is atrocious, and with the obsession their government has with keeping face, I sincerely doubt we’ll be seeing an independent Tibet or official recognition of the events of June 3-5th 1989 any time soon. However, China can no more be boycotted and cut off from the world economy than the United States can. And considering Lil’ Kim’s recent trip off the deep end, any solution to dealing with North Korea and it’s batshit crazy leader is going to have to involve China. However, we can’t turn a blind eye to China’s history of brutality towards its own people.

The answer, I think, lies in recent stories about how China has restricted access to sites such as Twitter in the lead up to today. Even with all the restrictions China has put in place, there are always still those resourceful few who find ways through. To borrow a quote from an excellent movie: “You can’t stop the signal”.

Looking at how the US has been dealing with Cuba shows that blockades aren’t the solution. On the other hand, the fall of the Iron Curtain was no doubt hastened due to the inundation of western media that occurred following the relaxation of state censorship under Gorbachev. Hopefully by inundating Chinese airwaves with uncensored news and information, the seeds of change can be planted in the next generation of leaders.

Liveblogging the Second Nova Scotian Elections Debate

6:50 Getting set up for the next leaders debate. Hopefully, we’ll hear a bit more about the environment and post-secondary education, which were overlooked for the most part last time. Also, while some tend to like that style of debate, I really am not a big fan of the cross-talking that tends to happen in sometimes. The more heated it gets, the louder and faster people talk, with volume eventually replacing rational policy arguments.

7:02 Rodney’s opening speech. Once again, the incumbent Premier is trying to run on his record. I’ve found it odd that a leader, whose province is bleeding young talent westward, would, in the middle of an election, use the slogan “proven record”.

7:05 CBC is using twitter, email, and YouTube for the questions tonight. Along with liveblogging on the Chronicle Herald and CBC websites, it’s been a good election for Web 2.0.

Also, here’s another debate liveblogger. http://contrarian.ca/?p=567

7:10 Question #2 is kinda weak. “Will your promises be binding?” Um… situations change buddy.

7:11 Question #3 DING DING DING! TUITION! I never thought I’d see a day when the PC’s response on a PSE education question would be better than that of the NDP. I did think the Liberal response was better, acknowledging the role federal transfers pay. The Premier seemed content with hanging his hat on what’s been done, rather than making tuition more affordable in the future. Are we going to hear about grad students?

7:12 Via twitter, another first…. I agree with CFS. Where is tuition in your platform, Mr. Dexter?

7:20: re: mandated seating times. Uh, no Rodney. It's the responsibility of the government in minority situations to ensure that the government maintains the confidence of the house.

7:31: Ok, stop thanking people and just answer the damn question.

7:33 On an earlier question on freezing public service pay and cutting MLA wages, if you want to attract highly competent people to the job (and in the case of MLAs, reduce the influence of lobbying), you need to pay them competitive wages to lure them away from the private sector.

7:44 Rodney is really trying to milk the "hometown boy" card from the Cape Breton audience "I spent a season on a lobster boat!".

7:48 "Say something nice about your opponents" hmm, I wonder how Alberta's premier would do on a question like that. He didn't have much to say when Kevin Taft stepped down.

7:51 ooo. “How to improve the decline in voting.” Rodney has no real answer, D250 was pretty much a bust. And the joke about wanting people who voted for the other guy to stay home on E-day was un-cool. Liberals talk about an all-party review to look into the democratic process, NDP non-answer. Sadly, no talk about electoral reform.

7:54 Liberals talk about transit wrt green platform! Yes! About time. Rodney talks about energy efficiency in public buildings, however what about the private sector?

NDP Supports Harper’s Evil Hidden Agenda

Well, no, not really.

They’re doing what every political party everywhere eventually does. They realize that in order to advance their agenda, they need a degree of power within Parliament. Right now, holding the linchpin on the Tory Minority (now that the Liberals seem to have discovered a backbone) Layton feels he’s in a better position to extract something he wants out of the government than if Iggy were to suddenly win a snap election. That’s just how our system works – part of it is policy, and the other is Machiavellianism.

Just like a few months ago: while the Liberals may not have liked what the Harper government was doing, they would have even less of a shot to represent their supporters if the PM all of a sudden found himself with a majority. Hence, staying momentarily quiet was the lesser of the two evils. The NDP, of course, went bat-shit crazy over this.

So, when it comes to “playing the game” that is Canadian politics, even the NDP aren’t above the fray.