|
|
Archive for December, 2009
As somewhat long term readers likely know–this blog has been online and in action for the last six months. The expansion in readership has been, quite simply, surprising. This most recent month, December, has seen a rather large jump in readership. In fact, the 1,227 page views completely eclipsed the previous three months before it. The blog has received a little more than the sum of visits in the months of September, October, and November.
This means that people are actually reading this blog. And more than just a few are.
It seems like I have some form of a soap box now to broadcast my message in the new year.
Most blogs, at least by gauging my regular haunts (daveberta, calgarygrit, and the random hodge podge of bloggers I am following on twitter), are having year end posts extolling the man of the year, such as calgarygrit, or some other venture, like Dave’s MLA-centric list of what has gone on with who in Edmonton. Glancing back at the past hasn’t always been my forte, however. Nor has it even been in my interest.
What interests me most is not what has gone on before but, in fact, what is about to happen. Of course to have an understanding of the past is important to gaze into the future and is fundamental to understanding the world around us, but that echo in one’s heart and a flutter of one’s mind of the future, whatever it may hold, is an instant draw for me.
The draw of looking forward to 2010 is cemented by the fiasco of Nopenhagen (misspelling is on purpose), the threat of another winter prorogation by Harper, the rather unharmed Conservative support even though scandal after scandal has marred the Conservative name, and, last but not least, there was the tumbling economy. Looking to the future, in my humble opinion, is better than staring at a rather terrible year.
And what a year is in store for us!
We have the Reboot Alberta movement kicking things up into high gear. Partially lead by daveberta through his blog and Ken Chapman also through his blog, the movement espouses not to political ends of changing policies or being elected but rather to change the public discourse in Albertan politics. There is a democratic deficit, as shown by the low turnouts in the last several elections along with the dwindling trend therein as well, to be solved and the progressives of the province can push for a ‘reboot’ of Alberta. The New Year, being fraught with promises of a better future, may have a lot in store for Alberta as this movement gets of the ground.
More information about RebootAlberta can be found at their blog here.
We have Ed Stelmach in the dumps at 14% approval… and a party out of nowhere, the Wild Rose, being the go to party to park one’s support as the Progressive Conservatives become more progressive than conservative. This division on the right and the willingness of Albertans to want either change or a clear vision place Alberta at a threshold. Albertans have never, ever been a group of people who have lent their votes to a set of parties. It is always all or nothing with Albertan voters. Either your win big, a new dynasty is made, and the other parties are pushed out into the wilderness–or you yourself are pushed out into political exile.
To see the Stelmach government jump to and fro for the next two years in order to woo the love of Albertans and the rebounding economy retuning the confidence of entrepreneurs will likely prove an interesting game to watch. Noting the royalty fiascoes of the last year, and how the Stelmach government just can’t seem to get it right, the repeat of Getty’s numerous economic screw ups in the 80′s seems likely, thus spilling gas on an already brewing fire.
Next, we have a conference on the Federal level in Montreal in March called “Canada at 150: Rising to the Challenge“. Liberal leader Ignatieff will be walking around Canada in preparation for the conference. By the way, if you’re in Calgary on January 14th consider slipping by the University of Calgary for Ignatieff’s town-hall-esque event.
Following the line of thought of Liberals we can turn to the Alberta Liberals with the yearly report. More than half of the debt of the Alberta Liberal Party has been removed, fundraising has gone up, the party has developed a twenty-first century grasp of technology and of communication, and, of course, has a charming and cool headed leader to boot. The yearly report is here.
Things are changing and there is an opening for Canadians of all stripes. The future does show some decent promise and, of course, it can only go up from what has happened in 2009.
        
I’m still angry about the Peace Bridge.
You want to know why I’m still angry about the Piss Bridge? Because it’s pissing away money and after several years of continuous tax increases we are shown (again) a dramatic disregard for fiscal responsibility in city hall.
And the name Peace Bridge is already taken by a bridge between Canada and the USA along Niagara falls. Also, there’s one across the Suez Canal in Egypt. Not that original, is it?
City hall has made arguments for spending the $22 million (with an extra $3 million for misc. costs to total the costs to $25 million) on the design from Santiago Calatrava, a Spanish architect.
Firstly, however, let’s look a little at Calatrava. His last project went over budget by 300%, by the way. Venice Grand Canal Bridge, according to councillors in Venice, was “a monument to bad administration and a waste of Venice’s money.” As artknowledgenews reports:
Calatrava gifted the Municipality of Venice with the project of a new bridge on the “Canal Grande” in 1996. As of 2007, the project is still under construction and it has gone though numerous structural changes because of the mechanical instability of the structure and the excessive weight of the bridge, which would cause the bank of the canal to fail. In 10 years the project has been inspected by more than 8 different consultants and the cost has raised up to three times the original expectations; however the work has not been finished yet. [Emphasis theirs]
I do not look forward to paying $75 million for city hall’s newest postcard-worthy project. Especially, of course, with this year’s budget shortfall of $20 million. There will be cuts in staff and other things to sort of cover this deficit. Then there’s the memorial drive improvements at $75 million. And, of course, there is the issue of the constant increases in taxes on everyday Calgarians.
The first of argument being is that it’s a tourist attraction. Huh. People are going to travel from China, the USA, and other places to see a tubed-shaped bridge? To think such a structure is going to be like the Golden Gate bridge or some other famous bridge is, quite frankly, stupid. It’s a small bridge with a huge price tag and to even ponder that people will travel miles, pay for hotel and food, and other things to see a single bridge is telling of city hall’s state of mind.
The second argument is that the new bridge is needed. Well, there’s 10th street’s bridge, Prince’s Island’s bridge, and the Louise Bridge within under two minutes of each other. The LRT’s footbridge is also close by. There’s also the issue of there not being a stop light on the northern side of where the bridge will be, so joggers will be jogging through traffic to get to the bridge. It’s inconvenient and the needs of the community are already being (mostly) served.
The third argument is that it looks nice. Well, there’s a few problems with that. It’s going to be a red blotch in the middle of Calgary–surrounded by gray and glass. Its going to divert the attention of people from the river, our blue sky, and nature to a single object: It’s going to bleed away any attention anything near it could have gotten before. In the winter it’ll be a glaring piece of Calgary real estate. Calatrava extols that this is a good thing, seeing that contrast is deemed beautiful by his type. I’m in disagreement, of course. The bridge in its all encompassing blinding red will give a large of attention to it but it’s going to detract from people taking a step back and looking at the diversity of the area. It’s a blaise new age bridge from the intelligentsia of Europe.
In other words, it’s not Calgarian. We have architects and engineers up to our ears in this city, and multitudes of future designers at the Schuulich School of Engineering at the University of Calgary. We have the skill capital to design our own bridges and design them well. It’s a tube that, in some strange way, honors our fallen soldiers and memorializes the brave souls who defend our country. Yet we pulled a Spaniard to make it for us, not any engineers or architects that have directly benefited from those soldiers’ too many sacrifices. We don’t need to grab a hold of some Spaniard to do a job a Calgarian could have done quicker, easier, and, most importantly, cheaper. Also, if that Calgarian screwed up he or she would face quite a bit o’ shame over his/her mistakes. Calatrava can move on, like he did with his Venetian fiasco, free of concern or harm.
We would have also probably gotten a bridge that actually had something to do with memorializing our military.
There’s also the concoctedness of all of this. The military rhetoric is mighty interesting, seeing that city hall vetoed the use of ‘Support our Troops’ stickers on municipal vehicles. Talk is cheap, I suppose–especially from politicians. There seems to be an abuse here of taking advantage of veterans to push through a bridge that is not needed nor wanted.
That aside, the covered ‘hood’ of the tubular bridge is perfect for drug deals and homeless people (expect that to increase from shutting down beds at homeless shelters and cutting anti-drug programs in Calgary, etc). I look forward to people complaining about the homeless and addicts being in there, and the need for police to patrol it, and then all the costs of doing so. Not only has it been expensive, it’s going to be an eyesore, more expensive later on, and not Calgarian. Did I mention expensive?
It’s a shame the Aldermen did this all in secret and then released their plan after they dolled out the cash for it. They realized, likely, that there would be some form of reaction against their building a bridge. But do you know what is the cherry on this cake? City hall is planning a second bridge and they’re picking an Albertan to make it. You want to know why they’re making this clear? Because they wanted to increase this second bridge’s quality by having a Spaniard come in first to make the quality of the second ‘higher’. Talk about a disregard to Calgary’s and Alberta’s able builders and engineers.
Oh well. It isn’t like I can do anything about it. They’re just pissing away money and will continue to. It’s unlikely that it’ll change. Taxes will keep going up and more pet projects like this will keep springing up and about Calgary. City hall will keep its silence, we’ll get a new bridge, and be reamed with more taxes. Let the good times roll (for Druh Ferrel and friends).
… the current sitting members of the Alberta Liberal and Alberta Progressive Conservative parties do not want to admit their misnamed parties really do stand for big government, anti-freedom [emphasis mine], micro-managing, social democracy.
[Source]
Ms. Smith calling her opponents anti-freedom is rude and against Albertan politics. This doesn’t help debate nor does it assist in the public discourse, and it is a flavour of a special narcissism so prevalent in other provinces like the vapid vortex of Ontario (blegh). It’s wrong.
Coupled with her denial of climate change, or at minimum her complete obfuscation and deflection of the topic as noted by Thomson of the Edmonton Journal, there is a serious problem on the Wildrose’s politics. It’s negative, yet it says it should be negative. It is for solutions to environmental problems, yet it is against the very scientific fact of climate change. Hypocrisy at its worse.
This is tiresome. It’s the same old politics by the same old people. It’s the Dinning crowd, and the rightwingers who were pushed out of the PC caucus when Stelmach beat them at the PC leadership convention after Klein departed, that are continuing their existence in the WAP. It’s sad. It’s depressing. It’s tiresome. And it’s the same old politics of negativity and hypocrisy.
It’s this reason why 36% of youth are aligned with the Alberta Liberal, and a minuscule minority are even contemplating voting for the Wildrose. It’s been recognized, this obvious negativity, and younger Albertans see it for what it is.
Message from Ignatieff about Mr. Rossi’s resignation that I received this morning at 7am (liberal.ca’s newsletter ftw) is quoted below.
Dear Rocco:
On behalf of all Liberals, please accept my most heartfelt thanks for your invaluable service to the Liberal Party of Canada. The enduring strength of the Liberal Party has always been our ability to attract people of the highest calibre and commitment to our banner. Your service over the past year as National Director is an excellent case in point. Under your leadership we have vastly improved our fundraising; our membership has more than tripled; and we are in a solid position to fight the next election, whenever it comes. Indeed, I know that all those who worked alongside you appreciate your hard work, support and dedication.
You have now decided to serve our fellow citizens in another capacity. I can only salute your dedication to serving the public good and your desire to seek the support of the electorate. Torontonians should be proud to attract talented people such as yourself who want to lead.
I wish you the best of luck.
Sincerely,
Michael Ignatieff
Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada
Not only did membership triple under Rossi’s directorship, fund raising in the first quarter jumped to three times what it was in the same time span the year before. Rossi has an awesome gift, along with a great team, working with him across the country. It’s a shame the LPC is losing him, honestly. The Torontonians (?) are getting a wonderful candidate for their mayoralty race coming up in the fall of 2010.
Now, however, there is the issue of replacing Rossi. The National Director, according to the Liberal federal constitution, is a position that is appointed by the Leader of the party. There doesn’t need to be an election within the party or any sort of mechanism to put a popular person in charge. Rather, an organizer will be appointed to the position of national director.
Warren Kinsella, Chretein’s executive assistant, quickly comes to mind. He’s from Alberta, but is incredibly tied to Toronto, and last night he squashed Tim Powers on CTV’s powerplay on the topic of hidden documents. Kinsella also has a book out called the War Room that has been used across Canada to start up media centres to engage in policy and debates in the public discourse. It was also one of my textbooks in my Canadian Elections class with Dr. Tom Flanagan.
So he knows his stuff. Since party renewal has been partially already done, and is being taken over by others in all likelihood, a new mode of communication might be needed. Kinsella might be the guy for that and will likely be a contender for the position. At least, I think he would be. Media savvy, reliable, outspoken, and, well, a guy who is outside the centre of the universe (note the sarcasm) of Toronto. He’s also from Alberta, too.
Warren Kinsella’s blog is at warrenkinsella.com.
Seeing that I’m not ‘in the know’ or remotely connected to anyone in Ottawa (Western alienation much?) I have no clue as to who else might be considered for the position. I didn’t even know who Mr. Rossi was before Ignatieff appointed him so I wouldn’t be surprised if I was surprised again by Donolo and Iggy.
Does anyone have any other people that comes to mind?
Filed Under (Politics) by LibVin on 11-12-2009
New poll from Angus Reid says that, from amongst 1,000 people called, 390 would vote Wildrose Alliance, or 39%. Steady Eddy is now tied with the Liberals at 25%. 9% are wandering out in the wilderness with Mason’s NDP.
Angus Reid’s poll is posted here.
Let that sink in for a moment.
And now for a “Look at the Polling”/Quick analysis:
- A party that has never formed government and has never had more than a single seat in the legislature now holds enough of a % to possibly grab a majority and definitely a minority. Smith’s message is definitely resounding here and will likely cause a lot of people to actually look to her to see her as an alternative to the PCs.
- This will likely put the pressure on PC MLAs who, in my humble opinion, won their ridings when they won their riding’s nomination will likely find that public opinion turning favorably toward the WAP and unfavorably against the PCs will encourage their jumping ship to the newer party. I’m not saying that it’ll happen but the thought will likely have crossed their minds the moment they pick up the paper today to see this poll.
- This could just be a group of people voicing their anger at the PCs by picking the nearest, flashiest choice, too. It might all be just one blip in the radar and nothing more. We will likely have to wait another month for another poll to see if this trend continues. That doesn’t stop me from looking at the numbers, though.
- There is a 1/20 chance that this poll is wrong. As a statistical tool, polling Canadians is not an exact science. Normally polls like Angus Reid’s relies on the idea that they can be right most of the time with a small chance of being completely off. That’s the issue with taking a group of 1,000 and extrapolating it to a couple of million people. Thusly, the chance of this poll being a weird, out-of-whack poll is 1/20 (5%) as per Angus Reid’s methodology page.
- Also, it should be noted that Stelmach’s Conservatives were int he lower 30% when election time came around last year. They ended up with a landslide victory there. So any poll should be taken with a grain of salt.
- Seeing that the Liberals in Alberta are likely feeling the blowback from unhappiness with the Liberal brand in Ottawa, which will likely cool over the coming months, that 25% will likely go higher. Smart, tactical NDP voters will likely vote tactically like they did in 1993 for Decore’s Liberal party, adding at least half of that 9% to the Liberal numbers. It’s possible that the Liberals could, in an election, hit a nice number of the popular vote between 30% and 35%. That puts in them in the game in most of Calgary and definitely a possibly dominating position in Edmonton.
- Vote split?: Note that the WAP’s polling % is likely of soft supporters, most likely, and would likely at least partially ebb away once an election is called. That puts them likely at around 35%. With PCs going up (it’s not like they can go down, can they?) they’d likely hit around 30%-ish. The right vote has been effectively split in this case and, quite likely, if the Liberals can argue themselves into the public eye it’d be possible to sap the protest vote going to the WAP and create the possibility of a Liberal minority with a divided opposition in Edmonton.
- Liberal sweep in Edmonton?: Last election Edmonton was partially won by the PCs by barely a few % points. The split of votes done by the WAP will likely give all of Edmonton, and some inner-city Calgary ridings, to the Liberals.
- Regionalism?: Alberta is divisible into four core areas. These are southern Alberta, northern Alberta, Calgary, and Edmonton. Ridings are heavily skewed toward rural areas, which increases the importance of N’ Alberta and S’ Alberta. The PCs, if we could see polling numbers for rural Alberta, likely have a rather strong hold on most of these ridings still seeing that the Liberals nor the NDP have any influence there. The major upset here is that the Wildrose is hitting into the high 40%s in rural areas in general, and on the higher end in S’ Alberta. The PC vs WAP split will likely become a contentious area for campaigning by both parties come election time. Calgary might be in the Wildrose’s back pocket if they play their cards right, seeing that a three way battle between the Liberals, Conservatives, and themselves allow for a highly contested race that lends itself to new, baggage-less candidates. Edmonton has already been discussed.
- Youth vote?: 36% Liberal voting intention for those aged 18-34. If you’re over 55, though, Angus Reid say’s 51% of your peers are voting WAP.
And that’s a “Look at the polling” for December 11th.
Who else is blogging about this?
Dave at Daveberta
Dan at CalgaryGrit
Pareta at Paretascene
Hugh at Freedom is my Nationality
The following is a transcript of Dr. Swann, the Alberta Liberal party leader, at his web town hall that he had today.
| 1:51 |
|
Moderator:We’ll be joined by Mr. Swann at about 2 pm. The Journal’s Graham Thomson will also be online. |
Monday December 7, 2009 1:51 Moderator |
| 1:51 |
|
Moderator:Please feel free submit your questions and comments. |
Monday December 7, 2009 1:51 Moderator |
| 1:52 |
|
Graham Thomson: I’d like to welcome Alberta Liberal Leader David Swan to our chat. And thank him for being here.
I’ll be staying in the background but might pop my head in now and again to see how things are going. |
Monday December 7, 2009 1:52 Graham Thomson |
| 1:57 |
|
David Swann:David Swann here. Looking forward to talking with Albertans. |
Monday December 7, 2009 1:57 David Swann |
| 1:59 |
|
Trish Audette:Dr. Swann, are you still working on rebranding the Alberta Liberal party? What might Albertans expect to see in the year to come? |
Monday December 7, 2009 1:59 Trish Audette |
| 2:01 |
|
[Comment From Molly Molly : ] Any further thoughts to a possible coalition with the Alberta NDP party? Or garnering further support from the National party come election time? |
Monday December 7, 2009 2:01 Molly |
| 2:02 |
|
David Swann: We’re working hard at renewal and change in the Party and strenghtening our constituencies. We’re also looking at a fresh image and more effective ways to connect with Albertans, especially youth, women and diverse communities. |
Monday December 7, 2009 2:02 David Swann |
| 2:02 |
|
[Comment From Chris P Chris P : ] Curious on your thoughts on health care in this province. Being currently employed with AHS i’m seeing some really upsetting stuff, especially in terms of cutbacks. ( An example is that we have a wage freeze fore 2 years and people like our CEO may get a substantial bonus….also have a super board now who voted themselves raises their first kick at the can). Just wanted to see what you thought of these types of things? |
Monday December 7, 2009 2:02 Chris P |
| 2:06 |
|
[Comment From Guest Guest : ] I would like to know your thoughts on tuition increases? I believe veryone should pay their share for an advanced education but would it not make more sense that people who are getting degrees in purely profit making areas, like engineers or agriculture pay more than those who are gaining a degree in an area that helps people, such as nursing? |
Monday December 7, 2009 2:06 Guest |
| 2:09 |
|
[Comment From ian hunt ian hunt : ] it’s the word ‘Liberal’ – anathema to a great many Albertans that needs to be changed before you have any chance of moving forward |
Monday December 7, 2009 2:09 ian hunt |
| 2:09 |
|
Graham Thomson: Any plans to revisit a name change for Liberals? |
Monday December 7, 2009 2:09 Graham Thomson |
| 2:10 |
|
David Swann: It’s important to distinguish between front line professionals such as yourself and the administration of the system. We are now in the midst of the third “re-disorganization” in 15 years which has created unacceptable financial costs and personal risks to both patients and professionals. I hear frequently from both groups about growing problems with access, quality and inefficiencies. We need to get back to basics; a family doctor for everyone, long term care spaces for seniors that are blocking hospital beds, home care services to keep people well and active in their homes as long as possible and a reinvestment in prevention.
On the issue of compensation it’s clear to me that this government has lost control of its spending and has lost the public trust given its huge salary increase last year to MLA’s and bonuses to senior people and some of the decisions of the Alberta Health Services Board you refer to. |
Monday December 7, 2009 2:10 David Swann |
| 2:12 |
|
[Comment From david w david w : ] with all the attention paid to the wildrose party these days, how do you plan to make inroads in rural alberta Monday December 7, 2009 2:12 david w |
|
| 2:12 |
|
[Comment From Don Don : ] I have two questions that are related:If the Liberal wins the next election, is there anything that you can do about Bill 50? Monday December 7, 2009 2:12 Don |
|
| 2:16 |
|
[Comment From Alberta Altruist Alberta Altruist : ] With the many regulations and difference in Royalties charged for our resources, do you think the right balance was struck in our natural gas sector. If not could you comment on what you would have done different, and whether you would increase natural gas royalties from 2007 in a depleting basin in these competetive markets. Monday December 7, 2009 2:16 Alberta Altruist |
|
| 2:18 |
David Swann: In response to the guest on tuition fees we do not support the substantial increases that have occured in the last decade. This has made post secondary education less affordable in contradiction to the govenment’s promise. Education, and in particular post secondary education is a fundamental investment in our future. My approach is to keep tuition as affordable as possible and limit any tuition increases to ensure students do not face the kind of dramatic hikes ths government is implementing. Monday December 7, 2009 2:18 David Swann |
| 2:19 |
David Swann: Graham regarding the name change; not under my leadership. Monday December 7, 2009 2:19 David Swann |
| 2:19 |
|
[Comment From David Paterson David Paterson : ] How do you plan on cracking the conservative stronghold that’s been in place for decades? It seems like young Albertans will lead the charge for the Liberals, but how will you gain the support of the “tax-break loving, leave me alone” type of people? Monday December 7, 2009 2:19 David Paterson |
|
| 2:20 |
|
[Comment From Cathy Cathy : ] I agree with Chris that the healthcare cuts are very upsetting. The CEO and Liepert keep stating it will not affect patient care and nothing could be further from the truth. I don’t understand why we need a superboard or what their purpose is when each hospital and clinic already have more than enough administrative staff. What is this extra layer really for. I don’t think it is necessary. Couldn’t we save some money by getting rid of the superboard? Monday December 7, 2009 2:20 Cathy |
|
| 2:21 |
|
[Comment From ian hunt ian hunt : ] As of yet haven’t heard anything from the Alberta Liberals with regard to the grossly unfair and regressive move by the Alberta Government to replace universal pharmaceutical care for Alberta Seniors with a high cost insurance plan as of next July. Monday December 7, 2009 2:21 ian hunt |
|
| 2:22 |
|
[Comment From Marg Marg : ] I’m inclined to agree with ian hunt who says we need to change the word ‘Liberal’ especially for Albertans who rail against that word. Monday December 7, 2009 2:22 Marg |
|
| 2:23 |
|
[Comment From V V : ] Who are you going to pick to run against Smith in Calgary North Hill? Monday December 7, 2009 2:23 V |
|
| 2:26 |
|
[Comment From Vanessa Vanessa : ] Wha tis your position on public education. As a parent of a grade 2 student and member of the school council parents do alot to fundraise for school programs and keep the school afloat. Our school puts part of its fundraising to support teachers salaries so that we can keep classes manageable. While I don’t mind some fundraising – parents are being asked to do more and more for basic education. Monday December 7, 2009 2:26 Vanessa |
|
| 2:27 |
|
[Comment From Mike Mike : ] Changing the name won’t solve the problem…people will still see the party and identify it as “the party formally known as the Liberals.” Monday December 7, 2009 2:27 Mike |
|
| 2:27 |
David Swann: To David W @t 2:12
I have worked for 2 decades in rural Alberta and understand something of the challenges and changes there in relation to economic development, land use, agricutural development,the loss of family farms and water management. I’ve also been travelling the province this past year as Leader and learned of some of the opportuntiies for diversity. Rural Albertans care about many of the same issues of urban Alberta. Health care, education, innovation and new technology are important elements I would ensure in all communities in Alberta. Rural folks must have sigificant input into the decisions on their future if they are to be sustainable. I am committed to an open and accountable government. Monday December 7, 2009 2:27 David Swann |
| 2:29 |
|
[Comment From Kevin L Kevin L : ] Besides, fear of a name is indicative of an ignorant and apathetic populace. Monday December 7, 2009 2:29 Kevin L |
|
| 2:29 |
|
[Comment From Kathy BP Kathy BP : ] It is definitely time for the Liberals to lead this province. But with such apathy among most of the voters, and tolerance of the status quo, I am fearful this change will not happen soon enough. Monday December 7, 2009 2:29 Kathy BP |
|
| 2:30 |
|
[Comment From Vanessa Vanessa : ] If the Liberals are elected will they make any reforms to the electoral system. The PC’s have an obscene majority from a few voters. Monday December 7, 2009 2:30 Vanessa |
|
| 2:30 |
|
[Comment From Guest Guest : ] Not a question – people have publicized the turmoil that is the front line of AHS but do not see the turmoil that exists in MedLab services. They are chronically understaffed, often cannot complete the workload within the U of A lab in a timely manner and therefore must send out to another lab; and staff live with the terrible stress of not knowing whether they will or will not have jobs after April. In terms of patient care, this is craziness that surpasses all understanding. Monday December 7, 2009 2:30 Guest |
|
| 2:31 |
|
[Comment From Waldo Waldo : ] If the Alberta Liberals win the next election and form government, what would Bill 1 look like? Monday December 7, 2009 2:31 Waldo |
|
| 2:32 |
|
[Comment From Bette Bette : ] Waldo, that is an excellent question. Monday December 7, 2009 2:32 Bette |
|
| 2:34 |
David Swann:Response to Don @ 2:12
If we were in government we would roll back Bill 50 to ensure there was an independent process to determine the need for multi billion dollar transmission lines. Unfortunately, because of this government, by the next election consumers will already have been charged substantially for some infrastructure. This government is not representing the publics interest in this decision. Three major builders sponsored the Conservative Party convention this year and are closely involved in Bill 50 and the infrastructure. This is unacceptable to me and to most Albertans.
Monday December 7, 2009 2:34 David Swann |
| 2:36 |
|
[Comment From James James : ] You have stated that Government needs to control spending. What would you specifically do to control spending? Would you cut any programs? Monday December 7, 2009 2:36 James |
|
| 2:37 |
|
[Comment From JAG JAG : ] Interested in your view on oil sands growth. The economy has slowed the pace a bit but it’s clear this is a large and important resource, albeit a challenging one from many perspectives. It seems Alberta is staking its future on technological advancements to reduce emissions. But will it be enough? The global rhetoric is certainly mounting. Monday December 7, 2009 2:37 JAG |
|
| 2:37 |
|
[Comment From MJ MJ : ] How is the Liberals going to resotre Alberta Advantages now it’s all but disappeared. Monday December 7, 2009 2:37 MJ |
|
| 2:38 |
|
[Comment From Guest Guest : ] I’d like to second Vanessa’s question on electoral reform. Monday December 7, 2009 2:38 Guest |
|
| 2:38 |
|
[Comment From nk nk : ] Mr. Swann, if you get young people involved in alberta politics we could overthrow the right wingers here Monday December 7, 2009 2:38 nk |
|
| 2:38 |
|
[Comment From DON DON : ] The only thing Albertans know how to do at election time is continue to vote the Conservatives in everytime, I actually am surprised that anybody takes the time and effort it takes to try and defeat a conservative !! Monday December 7, 2009 2:38 DON |
|
| 2:39 |
|
[Comment From Paula Paula : ] David, do you think David Watt had a viable point in his column when he said that Alberta prefers an “un-party” government? If so, how can Liberals make inroads into this kind of consciousness? Monday December 7, 2009 2:39 Paula |
|
| 2:40 |
|
[Comment From Kevin L Kevin L : ] What are some ways in which the Liberal party will continue to encourage proper discourse in the Alberta Legislature with such an overwhelming conservative majority? What can Liberal supporters do from the outside? Monday December 7, 2009 2:40 Kevin L |
|
| 2:40 |
|
[Comment From JAG JAG : ] You’ve been outspoken in the past about Foothills natural gas development. The LUF is supposed to more clearly define the boundaries and clarify things for stakeholders and industry. Do you think it will? Seems like a lot bureaucracy to this point. Monday December 7, 2009 2:40 JAG |
|
| 2:41 |
|
[Comment From Joe Joe : ] In keeping with a commitment to an open and accountable government, would the Liberal Party engage the Auditor General to investigate the Government’s financial dealings and publish the results? Would the Liberal Party be able to “encourage” the Auditor General to begin investigations now? (Hint, check Service Alberta’s outsourcing contracts and see if the Taxpayers are getting a good deal) Monday December 7, 2009 2:41 Joe |
|
| 2:41 |
|
[Comment From c r south east edmonton c r south east edmonton : ] Mr Swann do the alberta liberals have any plan to develop their own oil company and processing so that Albertans are not at the mercy and price gouging of the current companies? Do you have any plans that i can see? Monday December 7, 2009 2:41 c r south east edmonton |
|
| 2:42 |
|
[Comment From Bette Bette : ] My last question got lost…. Dr. Swann, what do you think of the idea proposed by the Democratic Renewal Project that the NDP and Libs sign a non-compete clause in certain ridings? Monday December 7, 2009 2:42 Bette |
|
| 2:42 |
|
[Comment From al al : ] you know that health care costs are unsustainable? What will you do to contain them? Monday December 7, 2009 2:42 al |
|
| 2:43 |
|
[Comment From MJ MJ : ] We need the rights to recall elected officials. Monday December 7, 2009 2:43 MJ |
|
| 2:43 |
David Swann: In response to Cathy 2:20
The elimination of 9 health regions and 3 major boards has created confusion, loss of important connections within and between teams of health professionals and added 1.3 billion dollars in costs just this year. All three indicators of health service-quality, access and cost effectiveness are worse. Just look at what’s happened to our pandemic influenza program. This was a planned and fully resourced program that failed the most vulnerable people in our population. Some central decisions need to be made by government but the delivery of services on the ground needs to be managed by regions if it is to be patient centered and efficient. Ron Liepert doesn’t understand the difference between a human service and General Motors, which he believes is a model for our health system. I believe this is costing lives and professionals our leaving as a result. Monday December 7, 2009 2:43 David Swann |
| 2:44 |
|
[Comment From MJ MJ : ] Absolute power brings absolute corruption. That’s what happened for the conservatives. Is the Liberal going to push for election reform? Monday December 7, 2009 2:44 MJ |
|
| 2:45 |
|
[Comment From MJ MJ : ] Knowing that it is almost impossible to overthrown conservatives for their mojority. What is Liberals’ strategy to convince Albertans that we need a stronger opposition? So that we can hold the conservatives accountable for their policy. Monday December 7, 2009 2:45 MJ |
|
| 2:45 |
|
[Comment From nk nk : ] The liberal party could have a much bigger impact now that there is split in the right wing vote, albertans (at least city dwellers) are progressive people and reject the social conservativism being practiced. How do you plan on getting progressive albertans involved enough to actually go vote and vote liberal? also what are your policies according to marijuana prohibition? Monday December 7, 2009 2:45 nk |
|
| 2:47 |
David Swann: In reponse to Ian Hunt 2:21
Seniors have been paying into our health care system for decades and I do not feel that they should be singled out for means testing and extra fees for medications. Monday December 7, 2009 2:47 David Swann |
| 2:47 |
|
[Comment From nk nk : ] we need more seats in cities, the uneducated rural ‘folks’ who support stelmach are ruining this province, do you plan to push for more seats in calgary and edmonton? Monday December 7, 2009 2:47 nk |
|
| 2:48 |
|
[Comment From Dave Jolly Dave Jolly : ] One of your prominent staffers/campaigners recently described your party as irrelevant. Do you not feel like the penultimate politician for gaining the leadership under the guise of renewal and name change, then reneging on your commitment to name change/renewal? Monday December 7, 2009 2:48 Dave Jolly |
|
| 2:49 |
|
[Comment From MJ MJ : ] Can the Liberals promiss no more new taxes, fees and keep the current tax rate at the current level? Many Albertans are afraid of the Liberals of the stereo type of “Tax and Spend”. Monday December 7, 2009 2:49 MJ |
|
| 2:49 |
|
[Comment From Dr. Phil McRae Dr. Phil McRae : ] Hi David, We have a great deal of transformational change proposed for our K-12 education system. In 2010 we will see a revised School Act and either investment or cuts to the education budget. What do you forsee happening to our K-12 learning system in terms of ‘transformational’ change in 2010? Monday December 7, 2009 2:49 Dr. Phil McRae |
|
| 2:50 |
|
[Comment From H H : ] ”tax and spend” is just rhetoric used by the CONS, the same could be said for conservatives who “borrow and spend” like our feds Monday December 7, 2009 2:50 H |
|
| 2:50 |
David Swann: In response to Vanessa 2:26
I strongly support public education and I am saddened by the cuts planned for such a basic requirement. We needs stable dependable funding for our schools. Fundraising should not be required for essentials as this is a vital investment in our future. I do not support public funds for private schools. Monday December 7, 2009 2:50 David Swann |
| 2:51 |
|
[Comment From Connie Whiteley Connie Whiteley : ] This government does not appear to do anything but stonewall – whatever the question or subject. They have been there too long. Only a bloated government would have the hubris to award themselves millions in bonuses and a whacking 34% raise in salary while our province and country is in the biggest economic turndown since the 30′s. It is more than time to ‘persuade’ the Auditor General to investigate this government. Monday December 7, 2009 2:51 Connie Whiteley |
|
| 2:51 |
|
[Comment From john john : ] Do you plan on keeping religion and the state seperate? Stelmach seems to have a problem with this idea Monday December 7, 2009 2:51 john |
|
| 2:51 |
|
[Comment From guest guest : ] Still waiting to see what a Liberal governments Bill 1 would look like… Monday December 7, 2009 2:51 guest |
|
| 2:51 |
|
[Comment From john john : ] yes! do you support public money for catholic schools? considering we have a seperation of church and state? Monday December 7, 2009 2:51 john |
|
| 2:52 |
Moderator:It’s almost 3, so there’s only time for a few more comments.
Monday December 7, 2009 2:52 Moderator |
| 2:52 |
|
[Comment From Alberta Altruist Alberta Altruist : ] Still waiting for a response for my 2:16 question. Don’t like this one? Monday December 7, 2009 2:52 Alberta Altruist |
|
| 2:52 |
Moderator:We’ve got more politcial chats coming up on Wednesday Dec. 9. Wildrose Alliance Leader Danielle Smith at 11:30 a.m. and NDP leader Brian Mason at 12:30 p.m.
Monday December 7, 2009 2:52 Moderator |
| 2:53 |
|
[Comment From Paula Paula : ] This is a difficult format in which a leader can respond to questions. Thanks for your efforts, David. Monday December 7, 2009 2:53 Paula |
|
| 2:54 |
|
[Comment From Kevin L Kevin L : ] I second Paula’s sentiments Monday December 7, 2009 2:54 Kevin L |
|
| 2:54 |
Graham Thomson: I’d like to thank Dr. Swann for taking part in this chat. I know from first hand experience how difficult it is to keep up without making too many typos. Monday December 7, 2009 2:54 Graham Thomson |
| 2:56 |
|
[Comment From MJ MJ : ] David you should have more townhall meetings to meet more Albertans face to face and can have more discussion. Monday December 7, 2009 2:56 MJ |
|
| 2:56 |
|
[Comment From Cathy Cathy : ] Thank you for your participation Dr. Swann. Sounds like many people an interested in what you have to say. Monday December 7, 2009 2:56 Cathy |
|
| 2:56 |
David Swann: In response to Kathy BP @ 2:29
It’s definently time for a Liberal government in Alberta with our centrist values representing most Albertans. With this incompetent government being eroded on the right, more and more Albertans are welcoming the values of the sensible centre; fiscal responsibility, environmental protection and social dignity for all. Monday December 7, 2009 2:56 David Swann |
| 3:01 |
David Swann: In reponse to Waldo @ 2:31
Our first priorities in government would be to establish the true state of our finances and move to the following:
1. Measures to make government more open and accountable to the people
2. Get the health care system back to basics
3. Remove unncessary red tape to business
Monday December 7, 2009 3:01 David Swann |
| 3:01 |
Moderator:Thanks to Mr. Swann joining us and thanks to everyone who participated.
That’s a wrap.
The chat will be archived for replay on this link. |
Monday December 7, 2009 1:51 Moderator Moderator:Welcome to our Live Chat with Alberta Liberal leader David Swann.
1:51
|
Loading ...
