The Alberta Liberal Archive

Just because you're paranoid ...

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sun, 12 Aug 2007 21:26:00 +0000

... doesn't mean someone isn't out to get you.

It looks like Alberta Liberal MLA Laurie Blakeman will be eating crow at her next press conference. Back here, I blogged about her weird attack on Premier Stelmach after he indicated that he would reject any attempt by Canada's other Premiers to impose hard caps on GHG emissions at the then upcoming Council of the Federation meeting. Such a proposal was rumoured to be in the works.

Blakeman went ballistic and accused Stelmach of erecting a smokescreen. She then described Alberta's position as "hubris", or "extreme paranoia". Evidently, Laurie Blakeman was of the view that the other Premiers had no such plan, even though the other provinces could make billions selling meaningless carbon emissions credits to Alberta under a cap and trade system.

From Thursday's National Post:

Canada's 13 premiers and territorial leaders will walk away from a three-day meeting on climate change today exactly as they entered it -- without an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. ...

Ontario, British Columbia and Manitoba were pushing an aggressive plan to surpass what they deem inadequate measures introduced by the federal government earlier this year. ...

(Ontario Premier Dalton) McGuinty came to the Moncton meeting touting an inter-provincial carbon trading market, known as a "cap and trade" system, which would set limits for greenhouse gas emissions. The arrangement, backed by Quebec Premier Jean Charest and others, would allow higher polluting companies to purchase credits from those who came under their limits.

Alberta firmly opposes cap and trade.

So, the rumours Premier Stelmach commented on were basically true, and Laurie Blakeman was completely wrong. Ontario and Quebec were pushing for hard caps, and a national cap and trade system. This wealth redistribution plan was strongly backed by British Columbia, Manitoba, and others.

Only Newfoundland and Nova Scotia were prepared to defend Alberta's right to set up its own plan. I like what Premier Danny Williams had to say:

"We don't want to basically slay the goose that lays the golden egg," said Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams, who controls significant energy deposits in his province. "I don't think Alberta should be forced into a corner or should be put into a corner. "We don't want to save the world on the back of Alberta."

It's pretty sad that Danny Williams is a better advocate for Alberta's interests than the sycophants in the Alberta Liberal Party.

Maybe one day the Alberta Liberals will wake up and actually attempt to represent the interests of the people they are paid to represent, rather than kowtowing to their Central Canadian masters.

Source (click for full screencap):

Alberta Liberal MLA Laurie Blakeman attacks Alberta

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 00:59:00 +0000

Wow!

But Liberal house leader Laurie Blakeman said Albertans should be wary of the premier's position: for one, she said, it's likely just a smokescreen to divert attention from what Alberta really wants from the conference. Former premier Ralph Klein regularly preceded first ministers meetings by suggesting Alberta would be ganged up on.

"I think it's either hubris on behalf of Alberta, which always thinks it is the most important at these national meetings, or it's an extreme kind of paranoia," she joked.

"They're using it as a smokescreen."

This is the segment of the article that provoked Blakeman's attack:

"The message is very clear: don't mess with Alberta," Stelmach said yesterday, in advance of the Council of the Federation - or first ministers conference, as they used to be known - in Moncton, N.B.

While the premier wouldn't confirm he'd heard rumours that other provincial premiers are going to gang up on him over climate change, Sun Media's Neil Waugh reported in a column yesterday that there are rumblings several provincial leaders - most notably Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty - will be looking for national "hard caps" on carbon emissions.

Stelmach said he was unaware of any such effort but if it does flare up, he'll say that, while other provinces were dithering in 2003 over issues raised by the Kyoto accord, Alberta was implementing guidelines for emissions measurement.

So, Premier Ed Stelmach comments on a reporter's suggestion that Dalton McGuinty and Jean Charest are planning to propose hard caps on greenhouse gas emissions at the Premiers' meeting this coming week (caps which would be inconsistent with Alberta's emissions plan), and Laurie Blakeman rushes in to condemn Stelmach for erecting a smokescreen, then accuses the entire province of "hubris", or "extreme paranoia".

Apparently Laurie Blakeman and the Alberta Liberals know for sure that Ontario and Quebec are not going to propose a national regime that would include hard caps. The rumour must be a figment of Neil Waugh's imagination.

It will be interesting to see what exactly gets said at the meeting, now that Blakeman and the Alberta Liberals have gone on record strongly denouncing the idea that McGuinty and Charest will propose hard caps.

Source (click for screencap):

Remembering the National Energy Program - 1

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 00:58:00 +0000

I was going through some archives on the CBC and came across a page on "Striking Oil in Alberta". There are some interesting radio clips on this page dating back to the implementation of the NEP in the fall of 1980.

I have made a recording of a couple of the most relevant clips. The first aired on the CBC on October 31, 1980, just after the 1980 budget when the NEP was introduced. It has two parts: (i) Pierre Trudeau responding in the House of Commons to Peter Lougheed's announcement of Alberta's intention to impose retaliatory sanctions, and (ii) Alberta Liberal Senator Bud Olsen being interviewed by Barbara Frum. During the interview, Olsen denies that the NEP was about Eastern Canada taking control of Alberta's resources, and was simply an effort to ensure the East got its "fair share". The clip of Olsen is a testament to the quisling character of Alberta Liberals:

Evidently, Olsen is too stupid to understand that if the Federal Government can unilaterally implement a vast new array of taxes and regulation on Alberta's oil industry, it effectively has complete control.

The second clip aired on November 2, 1980, and features a recording of Alberta Premier Peter Lougheed announcing the cuts to oil production. It also contains some calls from angry Alberta residents over the implementation of the NEP:

I'll post on the NEP again, as I come across further information.

Alberta Liberals at 19% in recent Leger poll

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Fri, 03 Aug 2007 19:17:00 +0000

Some bad news for Alberta Liberals:

Forty-one per cent of Albertans polled this month said they would vote for the Stelmach government if elections were held this month -- up slightly since June. ...

According to the poll, support for Kevin Taft's Liberal party is at 19 per cent, while the New Democratic Party sits at six per cent and the Greens at five.

Almost one in five people polled did not know who they would vote for.

The Leger Marketing opinion poll was conducted by phone among a random selection of 901 Albertans, between July 19 and 27. The margin of error was 3.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

This result is 10 points lower than the Ipsos Reid poll released on June 22, and 10 points off what the Alberta Liberals received in the 2004 election.

The article notes that the Tory slide that we witnessed between April and June, appears to be over.

If Taft can't do better than this against a stumblebum like Ed Stelmach, he really has no future as leader.

My advice to Kevin Taft is that he start polishing up his resume.

Source (click for full screencap):

Alberta Liberals call Washington trade office "a complete waste"

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:01:00 +0000

Alberta Liberal MLA Hugh MacDonald has characterized Alberta's Washington trade office as "a complete waste of money":

“It’s a complete waste of money is what it is,” said Liberal critic Hugh MacDonald, the MLA for Goldbar.

“How ironic is it that the current premier, Mr. Stelmach, and the former energy minister Murray Smith were in the ‘deep six’ together: the fiscal hawks in cabinet who demanded the closure of these overseas offices. Now, they won’t even tell us what’s he’s going to get for a pension from this job.”

Ministers do have to go to Washington sometimes, said MacDonald, while Smith spends most of his time entertaining. “They have executive assistants to handle the travel and meeting planning for them.

"They don't need Murray Smith ..."

The story notes that the office in Washington costs Alberta taxpayers a total of $1.4 million annually.

Of course, it comes as no surprise to those who follow the Alberta Liberals that they want Alberta's Washington trade office closed. Liberals (and New Democrats) want to impose their view of a highly centralized Canadian federation on Alberta, which means Liberal Ottawa must "represent" Alberta's interests abroad. This very aggressive centralization agenda mandates that the jurisdiction and activities of the Alberta government be reduced - and the role of Ottawa enlarged - in every area, not just trade. This blog alone contains stories on Liberals and New Democrats taking the following positions:

The Alberta Securities Commission should be shut down, and replaced with a federal regulator. (*)

The federal government should take over responsibility for setting education standards in the provinces. (*)

The federal government should become the primary regulator of growth in the Athabasca oil sands, and use the new federal regulatory power to limit growth to a level that Ottawa unilaterally deems "sustainable". (*)

This small sampling is just the tip of the iceberg.

I also note that Hugh MacDonald couldn't make it through the interview without taking a shot at the American government:

"... If Dick Cheney wants a busboy, he should pay for it himself.”

Typical.

An interview on Alberta's trade office turns into a personal attack on Dick Cheney. This sort of attitude, and this kind of cheap shot, are the norm whenever Liberals and their ilk discuss America or the American government ...

... and this is exactly why Alberta should continue to have it's own representatives in Washington.

Source (click for full screencap):

Alberta Tories at 34%?

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 15:57:00 +0000

Werner Patels has a post up on Jeffrey Simpson's latest column in the Globe and Mail. In that column, Simpson alleges that the Tories are polling at 34% in Alberta:

Rub your eyes, political junkies, when you read this: The Alberta Conservative Party stands at 34 per cent in the latest public opinion polls. Yes, poll numbers rise and fall. They are just snapshots. But still: only 34 per cent support for Canada's leading political dynasty, the party of Peter Lougheed and Ralph Klein.

I left a comment over on Werner's blog regarding the inaccuracy of the column:

In his column, Simpson states that the Alberta Tories are polling at 34%. I have seen no poll that has them that low, and just blogged about this yesterday.

An Ipsos-Reid poll published on June 23 had the Tories at 47%. There was a poll from Leger Marketing last week that put Stelmach's approval rating at 39%, and had the Tories at 34% in Calgary, 37% in Edmonton, and 45% in the rest of the province. That poll was reported in the Calgary Herald.

The Calgary Herald and Leger Marketing rarely get things right. They predicted Dinning was way out front in the PC leadership race, followed by Oberg. The rest, including Ted Morton, were supposedly in the 5% range.

We all know how accurate that prediction turned out to be.

Posted by: The Watcher ¦ July 18, 2007 at 09:48 AM

I, for one, don't buy this 34% nonsense. I think Mr. Simpson is letting his own Liberal bias cloud his reading comprehension.

I would welcome a link to a credible poll that has the Alberta Tories at 34%, and will open comments for this purpose.

Correction: The Calgary Herald poll that I refer to in my comment on Werner's blog as being published "last week", was in fact published on July 3, 2007.

New polls roundup

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 19:31:00 +0000

You can read about the latest Alberta provincial polling data at Nodice.ca. In fact, they have compiled most of the provincial polls since 2006 in one chart. Here is a screencap:

For more detailed coverage of some of these numbers, go to this post and this post at Alberta Alliance Watch.

When blogging Liberals, screencap often

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Mon, 16 Jul 2007 04:41:00 +0000

I noticed something strange today when doing up my response to Liberal tough guy Aman Hayer. His blog, "Wild Rose Grit", was formerly hosted at the following URL:

http://wildrosegrit.blogspot.com

When you go there now, you will find nothing but jibberish. "Wild Rose Grit" was definitely at this URL; it is where I got the screencap of Hayer's January 4, 2007 post (that being the one in which he intimates Taft should step down). Now, "Wild Rose Grit" is hosted here:

http://wildrosecitygrit.blogspot.com

If you look at the January archives, the January 4 post shown in my screencap has vanished.

So Hayer has changed the URL of his blog, and deleted at least one post. Why? If he wanted to revise history, why not just delete the January 4 post, and pretend it wasn't there?

And why keep the original URL, delete the posts, and insert some phrases from a foreign language?

I don't know the answers to these questions, and I certainly am not going to waste any time trying to find some logic in the strange behavior of Aman Hayer. However, it is obvious that Hayer is trying to cover something up, and he is willing to engage in destructive tactics to achieve whatever end he has in mind.

Which only goes to show that you need to have a good screencap program when blogging Liberals, because what is here today, could be "Hayered" tomorrow.

Liberal punk threatens lawsuit

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 22:59:00 +0000

Back on January 6, 2007, I wrote a post wherein I quoted a Liberal blogger known as the Wild Rose Grit, and accurately reproduced statements from his blog in which he impugned the leadership abilities of one Kevin Taft. In his post, the Wild Rose Grit stated Taft was about to "reach his expiration date", and he further stated that Taft did not have what it takes to be "Priemer".

His post seemed pretty definitive at the time, so, I was a bit surprised to receive an email on March 9, 2007, from "Aman Hayer (aka Wild Rose Grit)", asking me to take the post down, and threatening legal action if I failed to do so:

The Watcher (albertaliberalarchive)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please, Remove Post from January 6, 2007
1 message
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aman Hayer Fri, Mar 9, 2007 at 9:54 PM
To: albertaliberalarchive@gmail.com

Hi,

This Aman Hayer (aka Wild Rose Grit),

Could you take down your post, from Saturday January 6, 2007? You have taken one of my quotes (at complete fault of my own) out of context.

What I meant by the quote was that I am undecided on what Taft’s role is for our Party. I believe Taft is either the next Lougheed, who is now prepared to oust a dynasty. Or he is the person who is laying out the foundation for his successor and the person who will oust the Tory Dynasty.

I maybe forced to take Legal Action if that post is not removed.

Thank You Very Much.

~Aman

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hayer, your email is bullshit, and your threats are frivolous. I did not quote out of context. Here is a screencap of the post.

In the paragraph following the one from which I pulled the first quote, you state: "If the Alberta Liberal Party wants the premiership we should ponder a new leader." You then go on to list 4 potential replacements for Taft, and give the pros and cons of each.

In addition, several of the comments to your post reflect the fact that other people recognized this post for what it was - a call for Taft to resign.

I should have responded to your nonsense earlier, but, your legal threats didn't exactly leave me quaking in my boots, and I forgot about your email back in March. I am responding now because I happened to come across the email while cleaning out my inbox.

So, the post will be staying up. In fact, I'm thinking of forwarding it by email (along with the screencap) to Taft's office, in order to remind him that you were trying to stick the knife in him and destroy his leadership. As for the lawsuit, this is my formal response:

Bring. It. On.

Hayer, I will open comments on this post, in case you wish to respond here. I do moderate comments, but will publish anything you submit as is.

A fixer upper

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:19:00 +0000

"The Archive" reached a milestone in traffic last week, so I decided to give it an upgrade.

I have changed the blog template used on this site and at Alberta Alliance Watch. Things went flawlessly. I have also moved all audio to my shared media account on Twango. The server I used previously to host my audio files was a bit moody. Twango is much faster, and appears to be more reliable. If you are looking for a reliable, free, audio host, I recommend Twango.

Pretty impressed thus far.

Adscam investigation finally focuses on Jacques Corriveau

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 17:56:00 +0000

Blogger Trevor Harris has a post up regarding the ongoing investigation into the Adscam affair:

Jean Lafleur gets 45 months in jail and is ordered to repay $1.5 million that he stole from Canadian taxpayers as part of the Liberal sponsorship scandal. You would think we would be nearing the end of the road when it comes to tales of Liberal corruption, scandal and greed...nope!

A long-time Liberal party campaign organizer and friend of former prime minister Jean Chretien, Jacques Corriveau, saw his house get raided by the RCMP just yesterday. Remember him? Gomery characterized Corriveau as:

"the central figure in an elaborate kickback scheme by which he enriched himself personally and provided funds and benefits to the (Liberal Party of Canada in Quebec)."

I assume as time passes we will discover why - and who knows - maybe we'll find out who was driving that armoured getaway car when $200 million or so was heisted from hard working taxpayers.

But we can't forget the sage words from all Liberals when it comes to this historic breach of public trust - most recently uttered by MP, Mark Holland;

"It was in fact the Liberal party that called for the Gomery Inquiry, that called for the auditor general, that ensured we were able to go after the individuals who were responsible."

True... but it was in fact the Liberal party that was running the government when former Cabinet Ministers and dozens of Liberal friendly operatives violated the public trust by funnelling millions of dollars into the hands of people like Jean Lafleur. Pleading guilty does not absolve you of the crime. Nice try though.

Two points:

It is great to see Jacques Corriveau taking some heat. I hope some incriminating evidence managed to escape the paper shredder in the 18 month period between Gomery fingering Corriveau, and the police finally getting around to searching Corriveau's premises.

It comes as no surprise to see Liberal Party pipsqueak Mark Holland giving the Liberals credit for calling the Gomery Inquiry. In saying this, Holland is in fact dredging up an old mantra used by Paul Martin during his brief time as Prime Minister. For those readers interested in the full history of the Liberal Party's approach to Gomery, may I remind you that Jean Chretien and his entourage were against any type of inquiry, and thought Paul Martin was a complete incompetent for calling the Gomery Inquiry and shining so much light on this issue.

Alberta Liberals are "gristle from ear to ear"; Alberta New Democrats are "boneheads"

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Wed, 11 Jul 2007 17:46:00 +0000

That's the verdict of Calgary Sun columnist Paul Jackson, in a column he wrote on April 1, 2007:

Back to Alberta and our 36-year rule of the Progressive Conservatives.
Isn't it about time it's over?
Is it not time we got some fresh blood, and some new ideas at the Alberta Legislative Assembly?
Well, I don't think we are going to get any out of Premier Ed Stelmach and his team.
So what's the alternative?
Where is Alberta's Mario Dumont and ADQ?
It's certainly not Kevin Taft's zany Liberals -- every one of them gristle from ear-to-ear.
It's not Brian Mason's socialist New Democrats -- every one a bonehead.
What then, has happened to Hinman and the Alberta Alliance, which under former leader Randy Thorsteinson, hauled in 9% of the vote in the 2004 provincial election.
Where have they gone to ground. And why?

Why now? I just happened to stumble across this journalistic masterpiece, and found it funny. Besides, given the positions of the Alberta Liberal Party and Alberta New Democrats on federal-provincial issues, Jackson's comments are totally justifiable.

Have a pleasant day.

Source (click for screencap):

Dave Rutherford bitchslaps Mark Holland

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sat, 07 Jul 2007 16:52:00 +0000

I'm still catching up on posting audio files that have been sitting on my server for months. Today's clip is from February 2, 2007, and features Liberal MP Mark Holland being interviewed by Dave Rutherford.

I blogged about Mark Holland's nutty NEP II proposal here. Given the huge interventions into the Alberta economy being proposed by Holland, it should come as no surprise that the Alberta media picked up on this rather quickly. In addition to proposing a new NEP, the interview contains many examples of how ill-informed many of the pro-Kyoto people are.

I will fisk the interview at a later date.

Listen here:

Mark Holland's infamous attack on Alberta

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 17:13:00 +0000

Fun, fun, fun.

Today's audio is dated, but memorable. It features an appearance by Liberal MP Mark Holland on the February 1, 2007 Charles Adler Show. During the interview, Holland creates the impression that a Dion government would engage in a massive intrusion into the regulatory jurisdiction of Alberta over the Athabasca oil sands.

Holland was at one time considered an up and comer in the Liberal Party of Canada, and was appearing a lot in the national media. I notice that his appearances have been scaled back considerably since the spring.

Another example of the Peter Principle in action?

Listen here:

The David Suzuki Meltdown

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Fri, 06 Jul 2007 03:05:00 +0000

I have figured out how to embed audio in blog posts.

This is a welcome development, given that Liberals and their statist allies in the NDP and Green Party like nothing more than the sound of their own hyperbole, and this trait, combined with the fact that Liberals and their ilk don't know what they are talking about half the time, leads to plenty of factual errors - and overwrought displays of emotion - whenever a Liberal takes to the airwaves.

My first offering is a classic case of Liberal meltdown on the radio. It is a recording of a segment of "The John Oakley Morning Show", dating from February 15, 2007. The interviewee is one Dr. David Suzuki, and the subject is Kyoto. He is literally talking out of his ass the whole time he is on the air.

Suzuki also gets quite ticked at Oakley's intransigence and questions, and evidently stomps out of the interview just after its conclusion. More analysis of the many Suzuki falsehoods contained in this clip will follow.

Listen here:

New premier; new poll; same old result for Kevin Taft

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Thu, 26 Apr 2007 03:51:00 +0000

Today's edition of the Calgary Herald contains a new Ipsos Reid poll measuring provincial party support amongst Albertans.

Notwithstanding the optimistic blatherings of Alberta Liberals, the results show no real growth in support for the Alberta Liberal Party. In fact, the Alberta Liberals are still polling at 9% less than what the party received in the November, 2004 general election:

The April 10 to 20 survey of 800 Albertans found that almost 66 per cent of respondents approve of Stelmach's performance as premier (21 per cent "strongly approve," 45 per cent "moderately approve").
Those ratings aren't far off of Klein's support levels in the last weeks of his leadership (71 per cent) and very similar to the former premier's approval ratings this time last year (65 per cent), shortly after receiving a vote of non-confidence from the party.
"It's a first report card for Stelmach," said Ipsos Reid pollster Cory Davison. "It is consistent with the support given to the Conservative party."
The poll has a margin of error of 3.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Yet, backing for the Tories has dipped nine points since Stelmach took the reins in mid-December, the polling numbers show. And Stelmach is struggling a bit to get Calgary and southern Alberta on his side.
The Conservatives remain well ahead of the second-place Liberals, with the support of 59 per cent of decided voters in Alberta, and would still roll to an easy majority government if an election were held today.
The Liberals garnered 20 per cent support, with the NDP at 10 per cent, the Alberta Alliance at six per cent and the Alberta Greens at five per cent.
The results represent a nine-point drop from Stelmach's initial post-election bounce in December (68 per cent), but pollster Davison said the dip was to be expected after the immediate honeymoon with voters ended.
A regional breakdown reveals support for the Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville MLA is far greater in central Alberta (77 per cent), northern Alberta (70 per cent) and Edmonton (69 per cent), than it is in Calgary (57 per cent).

Back on January 9, Kevin Taft announced that the new Stelmach government would be divided, and that he was moving to position his party as a "government-in-waiting".

Well, based on this latest poll, Albertans will be waiting an awfully long time for a Premier Kevin Taft ...

... and thank goodness for that.

Screencap (click to enlarge):

Stephane, we didn't get it done ...

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Wed, 31 Jan 2007 07:15:00 +0000

That is the line Michael Ignatieff used in the recent Liberal leadership debate to ridicule Stephane Dion's pathetic record as Canada's Environment Minister.

It's not a bad line, but not a particularly good one either. Dion's comeback was: "Do you think it's easy to make priorities?"

Alright, we now know Dion isn't much of a debater. This may be the first self-inflicted knock out punch in Canadian debating history.

This is my favorite of the three ads released by the Conservative Party yesterday. The Liberals obviously have a huge credibility gap on the environment, and in electing Dion as their leader, they have handed the Tories a golden opportunity to exploit it.

Liberal blogger calls for Kevin Taft's head

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sun, 07 Jan 2007 01:03:00 +0000

Alberta Liberal blogger Wild Rose Grit has issued a call for Kevin Taft to step down in this post.

Kevin Taft is about to reach his expiration date. His role was to bring the Liberal Party back from its dismal performance in 2001. He has done it. But I do not believe he has what it takes to become Priemer.

Not terribly surprising.

I predict Taft will remain until the next election, and then resign on election night after the Liberals lose seats to the Tories.

It will be interesting to watch how much dissatisfaction spills out into the open before then, as the Liberals remain stagnant in the polls under Taft's leadership.

Stephane Dion's NEP II will be the story of 2007

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Mon, 01 Jan 2007 01:52:00 +0000

Well, it's prediction time.

In my opinion, the biggest news story of 2007 will be the federal government's implementation of the Kyoto Accord, the first phase of which comes into force next year. It is clear that the Conservative plan is a non-starter, so it will likely be fed into the nearest paper shredder whenever the Conservatives leave office, which I predict will happen as early as the spring of 2007. My crystal ball tells me that they will lose the budget vote at that time, although it is certainly possible that the Bloc Quebecois may support the Conservatives if the Bloc's poll numbers are lower than they would like them to be.

If the Conservatives are defeated in the spring of 2007, I predict that we will see a return to Liberal government, and with that, a return to the regional preference and discrimination policies that have been the hallmark of that party's success since confederation.

If the next government is a Liberal minority, it will be especially scary for Albertans. The government will likely seek support from the NDP and/or Bloc, and will have to strike a fairly extreme position on Kyoto implementation in order to keep these partners satisfied. They will insist on billions in spending, billions in new taxes and penalties -disproportionately paid for by Alberta of course - and preferential treatment for Eastern-based industry. The Liberal government of Stephane Dion will be only too happy to accomodate these requests, since votes in Alberta are relatively scarce for the Liberals, and certainly far less valuable to them than the potential billions they believe they can extract without any expense to the people that matter.

Given these predictions, one of my new year's resolutions is to cover the Kyoto implementation issue from an Albertan's perspective, while paying particular attention to chronicling the greed, lies, fear-mongering, and outright duplicity of the Kyoto proponents.

In furtherance of this resolution, I have begun gathering articles and news clippings on the Kyoto issue. Based on the materials that I have reviewed to date, it would appear the first lines of argument that Dion will attempt will be (i) exaggerate the dangers to the environment of the petroleum industry in relation to other emitters, and (ii) repeat the canard that the petroleum industry receives excessive benefits from the public purse - thereby conditioning the public for the upcoming cash grab. These lines of argument become clear when one focusses on the public statements of Dion since he was elected Liberal leader. For example, the day after his election, he held a press conference wherein he promised to "revisit the tax system" as it pertains to the petroleum industry:

"Certainly it will mean revisiting the tax system, but not to put the money out of Alberta - to help Alberta save their water, to save their development, to avoid acid rain, to reconcile agriculture and (the) oil industry." ...
... "In particular, the advantageous tax treatment oil and gas companies receive should be reviewed," his policy states.
"It is no longer clear that this special tax treatment is warranted given the boom in development, massive profits and rising price of all types of fossil fuels."

Source: Calgary Sun

Click for full screencap

Then, from the December 22, 2006 edition of Business Edge:

Dion said he will review existing breaks for the oilsands if he becomes prime minister, and will only allow them for companies that meet high environmental standards. ...
... Dion said he would not impose a tax on gasoline but would use fiscal measures to encourage companies to adopt green technology.
Alberta's oilpatch receives an estimated $1.4 billion in annual tax breaks through a program designed to encourage new construction projects.
Dion said the Accelerated Capital Cost Program, designed a decade ago to help the then-fledgling industry, is outdated and needs to be revamped.
"We will revisit it completely," Dion said.
"Instead of an economy based on waste, we will have an economy based on recycling, on the best environmental technologies available."

Source: Business Edge

Click for full screencap

So, to summarize:

Dion is basically confirming the Accelerated Capital Cost Program will be cancelled, which will result in an additional $1.4 billion to the Ottawa treasury (almost entirely from Alberta). None of the billions in direct subsidies and tax breaks to the Ontario auto industry, the Quebec aerospace industry, or the industries of Atlantic Canada warranted attention from Dion at his first press conference. Evidently, such things as cars, and Bombardier executive jets - which are the most polluting mode of transportation in the world - are less of a target in the gun sights of Dion.
The additional money sent to Ottawa will "not be put out of Alberta", but will be reinvested here to save our water, development, and farmland - and to save us from acid rain. Dion does not state the constitutional basis for these new regulatory intrusions into local developments and Alberta's farms. Is this another example of asymmetrical federalism, wherein the federal government exercises powers in Alberta that it doesn't even purport to possess in Quebec? Time will tell.
There will be unspecified additional fiscal measures directed towards the oilpatch, but there will be no tax on gasoline. However, I'm sure Dion knows that there are already an array of taxes on gasoline. In fact, gasoline is one of the most heavily taxed commodities in the country. We even pay taxes on the taxes on gasoline, so I assume Dion is saying he will impose no additional consumption taxes on gasoline. But what about regional and industry specific taxes? Does Dion have an economic study that would support such taxes? If so, where can I get it? If not, why has he ruled out a broader consumption tax?

Hopefully, during the course of the next year, I'll be able to find the answers to some of these questions.

On the other hand, I already know what the answer will be to the question of how the Alberta Liberals will respond to all this: they will go along with everything their Ottawa masters propose.

After all, you can't expect Kevin Taft to actually defend the people or businesses who pay his salary, and thereby jeopardize his appointment to the Senate, can you?

Kevin Taft: busted

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sun, 15 Oct 2006 18:24:00 +0000

This didn't take long (click on thumbnail for the full screencap):

I suppose Kevin Taft deserves some small amount of credit for rapidly retracting his false allegation. The fact that he failed to apologize for his unwarranted attack certainly comes as no surprise.

Liberals are arrogant, and will always equivocate and dissemble with words like "misunderstood" - which leaves open the possibility that the problem lay with the wording of the Order - rather than admit the real reason for this mistake was their own incompetent research and analysis.

A false accusation from Kevin Taft?

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sun, 15 Oct 2006 01:42:00 +0000

Alberta Liberal leader Kevin Taft attacked the government on Friday for supposedly passing an Order in Council that would remove the Alberta Health Quality Council from scrutiny under the Access to Information legislation. Here is a screencap of the story (click for the full web page):

The Government of Alberta was quick to respond. They state that the Order in Council Taft was relying on simply removed the Alberta Health Council from one of two categories that it had been listed in.

It remains subject to information requests:

I don't know who is correct here, but the ball is clearly in Kevin Taft's court. Has he made a false accusation, and, if he has, will he show enough class to withdraw it publicly and apologize?

Given that he is a Liberal, I certainly won't be holding my breath waiting.

Liberal math: 3 Quebecers = 8 Albertans

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Thu, 12 Oct 2006 00:28:00 +0000

I just read this post over on CalgaryGrit. It would appear that the delegate selection process for the federal Liberal Party is a bit of a fiasco. There are allegations of voting irregularities, and forged signatures on delegate forms.

In other words, it's pretty much par for the course in the natural governing party.

In addition to the scandals, it would appear that even Liberals are beginning to notice the regional favoritism in their party. The rules of the party are such that approximately 3 Quebec members have the same representation as roughly 8 Alberta members in terms of delegate selection. Commenter Jason Bo Green weighs in:

Wow, interesting numbers.
I'm inclined to agree with you, man - it does look like everyone bombed out in Quebec.
And - pardon my English, but just what the fuck is going on with Alberta getting so royally screwed on say/votes yet again?
Honestly, I'm amazed (and grateful) Alberta sticks it through with us ...

Jason, for your information, Albertans are not sticking with you, or the Liberals. According to the numbers CalgaryGrit posted, your party has a grand total of 3,299 voting members in the Province of Alberta. There are individual ridings in this province with more Conservative members than that. I have also heard that the number of members expected to vote in the provincial Progressive Conservative leadership race could go as high as 200,000.

The federal Liberal Party is completely dominated by eastern Canadians, as your leadership race shows. Albertans simply aren't interested in it (other than a couple of opportunists like CalgaryGrit and daveberta).

Ask yourself this: who is the last leader of the Liberal Party of Canada to come from Alberta, British Columbia, Saskatchewan, or Manitoba?

Got you stumped? Let's make it easier: who is the last western Canadian candidate to get a single vote at a federal Liberal Party leadership convention?

Think hard now. There must be someone.

New Leger Poll: Bad news for Kevin Taft

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 06:01:00 +0000

A new Leger Poll was released yesterday. The results for the Kevin Taft led Alberta Liberal Party couldn't be more laughable. Here is a summary of the results:

The Kevin Taft Liberals are at a pathetic 12% in the province, with only 10% of the popular vote in Calgary, and 6% in rural Alberta. This is about 17 points lower than the Alberta Liberals scored in the last provincial election.

The Kevin Taft deathwatch has officially begun.

Methodology
This Leger Marketing opinion poll was conducted among 900 respondents throughout Alberta, September 20th and 30th, 2006. The maximum margin of error for a sample of this size is ± 3.3%, 19 times out of 20.
The margin of error for each area, namely Calgary, Edmonton and other areas combined is ± 5.7%, 19 times out of 20. The Margin of error for the sample of self-declared PC Party supporters is ± 4.4%, 19 times out of 20.
Using the latest data from Statistics Canada, final results were weighted according to gender and region to ensure a sample representative of the province of Alberta population.

Source: http://legermarketing.com/documents/pol/061004ENG.pdf

College dropout Gerard Kennedy wants to run Alberta's education system

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Mon, 04 Sep 2006 04:06:00 +0000

Anyone familiar with the Liberal Party of Canada is certainly familiar with its obsessive impulse to take over the public policy functions of the provinces in areas of provincial jurisdiction. The most obvious example of this is the Canada Health Act, but the Liberal desire for total domination of the provinces extends far beyond healthcare. They have their beady little eyes set on education as well.

Don't believe me?

Take a look at one Gerard Kennedy, the "new generation" of Liberal. He started off in the Liberal leadership race with great fanfare, but, unfortunately, he has appeared a bit stale as of late, and is rarely mentioned as a frontrunner anymore. He has obviously decided that he needs a new schtick, and what better way to endear himself to fellow Liberals than to promise to do to education what Pierre Trudeau did to healthcare. Young Gerard may be a college dropout, but he ain't no dummy. He knows that nothing titillates a Liberal more than grandiose talk about national standards and new federal roles:

Kennedy calls for national education standards
Elizabeth Thompson
CanWest News Service; Montreal Gazette
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Canada should adopt national standards in areas such as education if it wants to compete in an era of globalization, says Liberal leadership hopeful Gerard Kennedy.
"A federal government can be much more effective if it takes the leadership role and I think that is what has been missing," said Kennedy, who stepped down as Ontario's education minister to seek the leadership of the federal Liberal party.
"We need to declare what our goals are, the provincial governments need to be brought along as partners ... These are the jurisdictions of the provincial governments but they too should meet standards, just like the federal government should. In the absence of that we will be unable to compete in the global economy."
Kennedy says those national education standards should be accompanied by federal cash and the provinces should work together to set them.
''If you look at the equalization premise in the Constitution it is about comparable standards. We don't even know if we have comparable standards. What we have is comparable funding, but what we don't have is the result. And that is going to hold us back.''
While he wants to see Ottawa play a leadership role in developing national standards for education, he says it would be a mistake to have a homogenous curriculum across the country.
Under the Canadian Constitution, education falls largely under provincial jurisdiction and provinces have jealously guarded their right to decide what is taught in their schools and which standards should apply.
However, the way Ottawa and the provinces relate to each other over their respective jurisdictions is just one of the things Canada should approach differently as it moves into the 21st century, says Kennedy.
Ever since he jumped into the crowded leadership race in April, Kennedy has sought to set himself apart as a candidate for a new generation and for a new century.
With less than two weeks to go before the next general Liberal leadership debate this time in Quebec City on Sept. 10 Kennedy is also working hard to show Quebecers that a guy raised in the West and who served in Ontario Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty's cabinet can understand Quebec and deal with its concerns.
Kennedy, who was criticized in the spring by some Liberals for lack of fluency in French, has spent much of the summer in Quebec.
Along the way, he says, he learned a lot about the province.
''I think I got a sense of diversity in Quebec which was really important ... I also got a bit of a sense, that I'm still sort of assimilating, about the whole relationship between Quebec and Canada and Quebec in its own past.''
And when it comes to how to approach Quebec, Kennedy rejects a tough federalist line as well as a more decentralized view of federal-provincial relations.
''I'm in favour of the third way which is basically to come up with a purpose that appeals equally to Quebecers and to the rest of the country.''

Wow! How fortunate. Just when Gerard needed an issue, along comes a crisis in education. Some people have all the luck.

I'm sure the parallel between Gerard's approach to saving us from provincial standards in education, and the Liberal approach to saving us from provincial standards in healthcare, is also a pure coincidence.

Let's review the essential elements of Gerard's approach:

manufacture a problem regarding provincial standards (in this case, provincial diversity would appear to be the problem);
use the fear factor to hype the problem to the brain dead supporters of the Liberal Party (Kennedy makes the unsupported claim that Canada risks falling behind in the "era of globalization");
propose federal government input and control as a solution (without explaining what it would do that the provinces are incapable of doing);
offer federal funds to bribe the provinces (the feds can always withdraw them after they have achieved full political control of education - just like they did in healthcare); and
exempt Quebec from the scheme (some provinces are more equal than others, and Quebec can be cranky when it comes to federal domination).

The fact that Alberta students are already amongst the highest achievers in the world on standardized tests (and perform far better than all other Canadian provinces) doesn't even warrant a mention. To admit that would be anathema to a Liberal. Provincial governance is something that Albertans must be protected from. Albertans governing themselves in an area such as education is a problem, because Gerard Kennedy says it is, and, by golly, the only way to fix it is reduce the role of Albertans in their own public affairs and increase the role of Ottawa Liberals.

So, there you have it. Canadian imperialism in action. Beautiful in its simplicity, isn't it?

It will be interesting to see if anything appears in the media in the next few days from the Alberta Liberal Party regarding this plan. After all, they keep insisting they are fit to govern the province of Alberta, if only the voters would give them a chance.

Here is Kevin Taft's chance to show some leadership on an important issue.

I'll keep my eyes and ears open Kevin, but, let's face it, since both you and your colleagues in the Alberta Liberal Party essentially agree with this agenda, you aren't going to challenge it.

It's just not in your character.

Source: The Montreal Gazette

Google News: Your search - "Alberta Horizons" - did not match any documents

noreply@blogger.com (The Watcher) — Sat, 02 Sep 2006 17:46:00 +0000

The pathetic political performance of Kevin Taft's Liberals has continued unabated over the course of the summer. You may recall that the inept Mr. Taft was quoted in this blog entry back on April 17, 2006. At that time he was boasting about how he was going out on a province-wide tour to "promote his party's vision for Alberta." That vision was evidently contained in a policy document entitled "Alberta Horizons".

The summer is now over. How did the Alberta Liberals make out in their latest attempt at making themselves relevant to Albertans? Well, when one searches Google News, the phrase "Alberta Horizons" does not even appear anywhere in the media.

Not good.

Furthermore, according to this story in the Calgary Herald, the Taft Liberals would do even worse against a Tory party lead by Jim Dinning or Lyle Oberg (15% support) than they would against Ralph Klein (measured at 18% support in March):

When respondents were asked which political party they would most likely vote for, 46 per cent said they would back a Dinning Conservative party, compared with 15 per cent for Kevin Taft's Liberals and eight per cent for Brian Mason's NDP.
The Green party and Paul Hinman's Alberta Alliance rounded out the mainstream parties with five per cent each.
Oberg, meanwhile, would nab 42 per cent of public support as Tory leader, with the remaining parties receiving backing similar to that if Dinning were party chief.
The Leger poll was conducted throughout Alberta, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20 ...

Kevin Taft has been railing against the Progressive Conservatives since at least 1997, when he published his razor-thin book "Shredding the Public Interest". The Alberta Liberals are now polling at about half the level of support they received less than 2 years ago in the Alberta provincial election.

Grab a brain Alberta Liberals.

How long are you going to let this ineffective demagogue cling to power? Isn't it time for Kevin Taft to get "Chretiened"?