Real-Time Discussion
Categories

Subscribe to my Feed

About Chris
Links & Blog Roll
The Fine Print

Entries in Alberta PC Party (18)

Thursday
Jul292010

Lost in the numbers

DateThursday, July 29, 2010 at 8:59PM

NOTE: DUE TO MY LACK OF BEING ABLE TO RENDER HTML TABLES, AND THE AMOUNT OF BORING NUMBERS IN THIS POST, I EXPECT YOU TO FALL ASLEEP READING THIS. BUT AS I ALWAYS SAY, YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR HERE.

When I read this article I am reminded of a saying learned long ago. "I may have been born at night, but not last night."

The crux of the article is how the Alberta Government just last year, spent $24 million terminating the employment of 450 nurses (for approx $53,000 each), in response to what Health Minister Gene Zwozdesky called "the worst global recession that’s hit since the 1930s". The article then talks about the prior year and how Alberta and Albertans were literally dying for nurses. We were short 1500 nurses and were recruiting from the Phillipines, India and the United Kingdom.

Of course the article goes on to say how we now again have a nursing shortage and the budget allows for hiring many of the same 450 positions back.

So, as much as I detest digging through the numbers, I was very interested in how the planning of such things looks from hindsight. Not surprisingly, it looks like simple bad planning on the surface.

Budget vs Actual Results from 09/10

Total Budgeted Revenue  -  $31.677 Billion

Total Actual Revenue  -  $35.652 Billion  ($3.985 Billion OVER budget)

Total Base Budget for Health Services  -  $12.935 Billion

Total Actual Health Services Costs  -  $12.946 Billion ($11 Million over budget)

So, we at least have to see what was an obvious and blatant OOPS, which if being honest our government would have been well aware of at some point in mid 2009/2010 budget year. I am prepared to forgive this OOPS on the revenue line, but I can only surmise that the government entered a slash at all costs mentality at some point mid-year and decided to cut the 450 jobs, reduce healthcare service to Albertans, and incur the $24 Million one-time expense.

But this is where Minister Zwozdesky's simple statement starts to rub me the wrong way.

2010 / 2011 Budget

Total Budgeted revenue  -  $34 Billion

Total Budgeted base-funding Health expense  -  $14.3 Billion (an increase of nearly 10% over 09/10)

"Ok Chris, this is getting boring, please move on to your point....."

My point is this. The government simply screwed up, IF you want to give them the benefit of the doubt. But even if the government did THINK that 2009/2010 revenue was expected to hit the original lower number, they had a choice to make about terminating 450 nurses to bring the health budget back into line. It's around the same time they were making that choice, that they were budgeting for 2010/2011, and assumed a new revenue number of $34 Billion.

I am sure that budgeting a $34 Billion enterprise is a difficult excercise, and although I have built and managed many budgets, (not Billions but over $100 million), I know more that mistakes in the 10-20% range are not only possible, but very likely. Especially in a resource based economy like ours.

So my point, in summary (I am even starting to bore myself):

It's OK to be wrong. But when it is very obvious that you screwed up, and sometimes even when you are being pressed by your competition, it is best to simply say so. The truth probably lies somewhere between a knee-jerk reaction by the Premier and Minister Liepert at the time to cut costs, even recklessly, and the government actually not knowing what 2010/2011 might bring.

The mistake is maybe even forgiveable. But not accepting responsibility and refusing to work towards a culture of improved planning and treating employees and our tax dollars with humility, is not.

Finally, I must give credit where credit is due. Much has been written about Minister Dave Hancock agreeing to underwite operating deficits in the Education budget, so teacher lay-off can be avoided while hiring cycles took their course. We need to recognize that for the leadership and good planning that it was. Oh, and yes kudos to the Liberals for pointing it out.

BUDGET FILES USED FOR THIS POST:

2009 / 2010 budget vs. actual

2010 / 2011 budget

AuthorChris LaBossiere | CommentPost a Comment |
tagged , , , , , , in
Wednesday
Jun302010

The answer is NOT the solution.

DateWednesday, June 30, 2010 at 1:17AM

I have been inspired by the difference of opinions between Dave Cournoyer and Ken Chapman, expressed over the recent Wildrose Aliiance AGM. You need to read Dave and Ken's posts to see the genesis of this. (Also read the comments)

I tend to agree with both of them.

The problem in my mind is that they both speak the obvious. Although I would agree that Ken's post is a bit too agressive against the Wildrose Alliance Party; Dave's is not reaching far enough out for a solution to Alberta's political problems. Hence my title, the answer is NOT the solution.

As Dave has pointed out, the Wildrose Alliance has provided us with the most plausible alternative to the current government in Alberta. Let's face it, Danielle Smith and her backers have presented a Conservative solution which is committed to change, speaks of democratic reform, and maintains an exciting and populist electricity which is head and shoulders above the existing PC government's.

But also as Ken has basically pointed out, the Wildrose is simply the most sophisticated version of the old way of doing politics. Without a doubt, they are focused on the existing 40% of those Albertans who voted in the last election, and the majority of them who voted Conservative. There is no effort to appeal to a broader swath of Albertans who are not already aligned with the right side of the spectrum, and in fact they seem to be working to appeal to the right of right, or the single minded economic/oil economy populist crowd.

So what of this? Please read the title of this post again. In my humble opinion; THE ANSWER IS NOT THE SOLUTION. What I mean is that our GOVERNANCE needs are more complicated that simply satisfying the political ANSWERS needed to win an election. We need to focus on broadening the discussion, the electorate, and ultimately the policy of the Province to actually SOLVE problems.

We live in a Province where only 40% of the electorate chose to vote in the last election. In Grande Prairie, where I sit tonight, closer to 30% voted. You can blame that on the electorate, but we must do better to find the root cause of that. In Grande Prairie for example, 75% of the population is under 45 years of age. It is not a coincidence that almost the exact inverse percentage of voters in Grande Prairie aligns with the percentage over 45. Let's be frank with each other, most of these young people do not care TODAY about politics, and may be looking to their next pay-cheque and to buying their next vehicle (I know a generalization). But they will care about politics eventually, and perhaps equally as important, they consume Provincial resources and Municipal services today.

I am reticent to generalize, but I am also certain that we are lacking in real political solutions, and only being offered up politically convenient answers. I don't have all of those solutions, but I do have many questions that need solutions. I start with these:

  • How can the Provincial Government btter work with Municipal and Community based organizations to make a closer, more relevant connection to Albertans?
  • What is being done Provincially to assist, and celebrate our First Nations people so their quality of life is even closely compared to their burgeoning demographic and historial cutural significance?
  • What can be done to make every Albertan, regardless of social, economic or political persuasion feel engaged in the process?
  • What meaningful balance is being proposed in economic diversification to our oil and gas economy. Even if that was to include leveraging our expertise and strength in that core segment?
  • How is government innovating to allow for a closer connection between the voter and their opinions? How is technology, transparency and direct democracy being embraced to make voters feel more connected to the process?
  • We know that young Albertans care about their communities. How is Government working to reconnect these young people with the democratic process, so they don't feel their values and ideas are not worth pursuing or voicing?
  • So many more...

If it seems like I am rambling, well I have a reason. Tonight was another Alberta Party Big Listen, and these were some of the many really interesting discussion points that I was involved in tonight. So yes, I am also asking myself, and my party these same questions. But you can rest assured that I won't be looking for the answers strictly among those who voted in the last election, or those who happen to fit the tight demographic both Conservative parties are fighting over. I will do the hard work to look for SOLUTIONS that work for all Albertans.

NOTE: These are NOT the thoughts of the Alberta Party officially and are mine alone.

AuthorChris LaBossiere | Comment3 Comments |
tagged , , in ,
Monday
Apr122010

I'll meet you in the middle.

DateMonday, April 12, 2010 at 10:57PM

I am not going to comment on today's announcement by Dave Taylor to leave the Liberal Party, other than to key on something that he said which resonates with me. On Taylor's website today, in part of his announcement to the public he says this:

"The other two parties both come at it from the far ends of the political spectrum. The majority of Albertans don't want that. They want sensible, moderate, pragmatic solutions that are fiscally responsible, socially progressive, and that put Albertans first."

This is where I think the story is. All of the speculation aside about Mr. Taylor's future, I would support him today as an independent, because he seems to understand that many Albertans are sitting in the middle of the current political debate, and are either not being heard, or have left the discussion altogether.

Polarization of those who still actually care about our current state of politics hasn't helped.

No party will ever win government in Alberta by being anti-business, loose spenders, and nanny-state supporters. But for some reason or another, the "right-wing" of our political spectrum has paired economic good-governance with a retreat on the social side of the agenda, and they have ignored other important issues to Albertans. Poverty, education, helthcare, the environment, people with disabilities, equality and social tolerance for every individual; these are also important to Albertans. Our current conservative alrtenatives stake their argument on the virtues of a libertarian society where the government gets the hell out of the way, and let's every man/woman make their own claim in the World. For matters of money, that is nearly believable, but in matters of protecting others and our environment, that position loses credibility when there are those who simply can not help themselves, and time and again we have seen unregulated business do harm.

The Liberals and the NDP's have done a similiar disservice to the left side of the spectrum, by being anti-everything the current government does, and in the ND's case, they extend their 100% opposition to everything business.

We have to stop buying this all or nothing mentality. We must start to de-polarize politics and find some common-ground between the haves and have-nots, between unadulterated financial progress at the expense of our future and environment, and we must accept embrace the differences of a modern culture.

I have faith in Albertans to expect this from our politicians, and it starts by applauding dissent and debate within our existing political parties. The fact that the Liberal Party has stood today and told us that they are doing great and it's leader is strong, is ignoring the reality. They have continuously failed to inspire Albertans, and they are paying the price. The head-in-the-sand response by the PC Party to it's own recent woes, has been an even greater example of how not to inspire.

Our current parties are suffering from target fixation, and talking to the smaller and smaller polar ends of the politically engaged. This can't survive forever, and it is up to us to find new leaders, new ideas, and give them our support. Otherwise, as I like to say, "out of the room, out of the deal".

If that includes a fracturing of the existing political parties to coalesce to a more moderate middle ground, then it can't happen soon enough.

AuthorChris LaBossiere | Comment4 Comments |
tagged , , in
Wednesday
Mar172010

Leprechauns and statesman politicians.

DateWednesday, March 17, 2010 at 6:52AM

Happy St. Patricks Day. My post today was inspired by a mythical creature, the leprechaun, and the risk of us adding another creature to the mythical list, the statesman politician.

One of the things I would love to see changed in modern politics, would be a change of tone in how our politicians debate each other and how they speak to us the constituent. Lately politics has largely become noise, with the loudest or the one with the best sound bite often winning the headline. Of course our problem as regular Albertans, is that we trust the headline and then move on in our day, not digging deeper into issues, or holding our Politicians accountable for their words. Statesmanship from our leaders has almost entirely dissapeared.

Every party is guilty of it, and it's contributing to voter disenfranchisement as much as anything else. If I have to listen to high-paid adults screaming at each other, often sounding like elementary aged school-children, I am just as likely to just "turn off the noise" and go hunting.

The problem with this scenario is that the people who are left behind, those who try to tolerate the noise, are the only ones debating and sadly voting on an issue. Regular Albertans have demonstrated by not voting that either they don't care, they don't believe their vote will make a difference, or that no matter who they vote for, things won't change. It has to be one of those, and I personally think the latter is the most likely reason.

Yesterday I shook my head as the Wildrose Alliance Party sent out a newsletter to all of it's membership; a broader email newsletter broadcast list (of which I have been added to without my permission), blogged on it's website, and filled the social media stream; with this information bulletin.

The bulletin basically accuses the PC Party of lying to Albertans about the 2010 budget defecit. They make it sound like the Party has chosen to change the way Government accounts for things, by stating the deficit is less than it is. The bulletin basically accuses the Government of Political Slight-of-Hand but it's actually using the Exact Same Technique. Just noise in my opinion, but frankly that's the way the game is being played.

I won't go through the full detail of the issue, because it will bore the hell out of you (which is why most Albertans simply shut this stuff off), but basically here is the debate:

  • The Alberta Government budget was developed using an Accrual Method of accounting. This basically means that expenses which are more "Operating" in nature are expensed in the period that they are incurred, and "matched" with the revenues of the Government.
  • the other type of expenses, Assets Purchased or Pre-Paid Expenses, are Depreciated (expensed) over the life expectancy of the asset.
  • As far as my research can see, all Governments, nearly all businesses but small business, and all Non-Governmental Organizations use Accrual Method accounting. It is what's called a Generally Accepted Accounting Principal (GAAP).
  • Cash Accounting is the other method, and it's a much simpler accounting method where all expenses (operating and asset) are offset against all revenues (regardless if that revenue is being collected for future expenses)

In my opinion there should be ZERO debate between which method our govenment uses. Accrual Method accounting is the global standard for all organizations that are even modestly complex or sophisticated. In an other example, my small business ($4 - $5M per year in revenues), uses accrual method accounting.

I can't believe for a second that any party would support Cash Accounting as a method for budgeting something as complex as a large government, especially when simple things like Operating Budgets and Capital Budgets are the day-to-day reality, set in place for decades.

So, I will give the Wildrose Alliance and their Leader (who posted this yesterday), the benefit of the doubt and assume that they are not proposing a shift to cash accounting in Alberta. But the obvious other issue then, is how they are simply playing the same game they are accussing the PC party of doing, and using Political Slight-of-Hand to try and lower the bar of the discussion.

If you read the bulletin you will see what I mean. The whole first paragraph and even title basically suggest that the PC government is LYING to Albertans, but really what is happening is that the Wildrose is simply STATING TWO DIFFERENT TRUTHS. It's a ridiculous sham and would be easily understood as such by anyone who takes a few minutes to research the issue.

 

 

I know that every political party does this type of gamesmanship, I guess I would just like to see the tone changed. I am hugely concerned with the way the PC Party BUDGETS and GOVERNS but I am not at all concerned with the way they account.

I would like to see opposition parties start to propose innovative solutions to old problems, use constructive and respectful tones with other politicians and Albertas, and start to focus on good governance as opposed to good politics.

I also want a jet-pack and a unicorn.

AuthorChris LaBossiere | Comment1 Comment |
tagged , , , in ,
Saturday
Feb202010

The Alberta Party is a game changer, at least for me personally. 

DateSaturday, February 20, 2010 at 3:01PM

Let me share with you my personal thoughts and experiences on the recent "re-launch" of The Alberta Party. These are not official thoughts of the Party but of one person who has chosen to participate in, and support it.

I have been a member of the Alberta Party Board of Directors now for over a month. I joined the Party and the Board, in advance of the recently announced "merger" with the Renew Alberta movement; although I certainly supported the idea if it was done with some conditions. I say movement because Renew was not and never has been a registered party. That said, the people behind it are a passionate and sophisticated bunch, who have expressed the same concerns I have about the way politics and power have interfered with good governance. I like that they don't talk in the old partisan language of left vs right. I like that they seem to see a more complicated World, where simple "pick a side" mentality gets us no where.

I joined the Alberta Party for one reason, it was an opportunity to help be part of something truly different. I met and talked with each of the Board members over the last few months, and was very comfortable that they represent what I would call average Albertans; who cared. Contrary to the typical uneducated first-response to what people THINK the party is about, I found a group of people who are actually quite reasonable and non-agendized, but simply concerned with the future of Governance and Democracy in Alberta. They reaffirmed that by being open to working with the Renew Alberta movement since it had much of the same goals. Of course everyone had their own special reason for why they were involved, but it was important to everyone that the party would feel comfortable to all Albertans. At least those who are open-minded, tolerant and cared about democracy.

You will hear from those who don't actually know this group, that the Alberta Party is a right-wing fringe party, which doesn't align with a more moderate political spectrum. That is simply not the case. In fact, if you know the unique and interesting history of this very small group of people, they have actually resisted time and again the "right-wing factions" that have tried to merge with them. The current Wildrose Alliance Party (called the Alliance Party at the time) being one of them.

But let me also be clear, I am "right-wing" on some things, and more centrist on others. Old style labels don't fit me anymore. And I will be careful not to apply them too broadly here. But a parties actions and it's policies will have to be what defines them.

The other major misconception in the early days of this announcement, has been that the Alberta Party has thrown out it's policies, and by doing so has shown disrespect to the long-standing party members who helped develop them. Again this is simply not true, and typical of an opposition that must find something bad about it's competitors instead of recognizing this for what it really is.

The real truth is that the Alberta Party Board (not Renew Alberta) unanimously accepted a resolution to suspend the existing policies, while the party engages in a very sincere and grassroots campaign to engage as many Albertans as possible in what is being labeled The Big Listen. The Board actually showed great vision and humility, and agreed that the small set of policies that they had in place, were the ideas of a very small group of Albertans developed over the last 25 years, and may not actually reflect what so many more Albertans would want to see in a party that really listens to it's constituents. They also showed openness and humility in accepting that perhaps Alberta has changed as well. Within the resolution, the policies that were suspended will be reintroduced at a policy convention in the future, and considered again with all of the policies that will percolate from the Big Listen campaign. They smartly recognized that Renew Alberta has the passion and ideas to run this campaign successfully, with the support of and under the guidance of a new and bigger, more diverse board.

The great thing about The Big Listen, is that you don't have to be a party member to say your piece. You will be asked what concerns you, your family or your community about government today. It is recognized that 60% of Albertans chose not to vote last election, and less than 95% of Albertans choose not to join a political party. These folks still have concerns, hopes, and a vision for Alberta, and they should have a say in how our government functions.

Every other political party has a completely different model, and one that creates distrust and barriers for the disengaged to participate. Here is what you hear time and again from existing parties; "If you want to change our policies, join our party and contribute your ideas. Submit a policy resolution into our process and good luck convincing the established biases, power centres and special interests which have already formed within our party" (Cynicism added where I think it is often applied by people like me).

Thanks, but that doesn't get me too excited. Especially since my personal experience, at least with the PC Party, is that this process sounds good on paper, but it hits a brick wall if the idea is contrary to the existing power structures holding onto self-serving power or influence. (Bill 44 was my personal example).

So, for me personally, this Alberta Party has at least provided a place where I can try to improve my Province, and feel that I can actually make a difference. Of course I am not naive and will be wary of the same command and control power struggles developing within it. However, since at least this Party is approaching politics from a bottom up perspective, I have that much more confidence that me and the rest of the people who are willing to participate in The Big Listen and eventually in policy development, will be able to bake-in some real and lasting cultural, policy and technical differences that can change the way the game is played.

Finally, there are those who will argue that this will actually harm the process by vote splitting or distracting the electorate with too many choices. I am sorry, but in my personal opinion, these folks are stuck in the old mindset of winning is everything, even if it means accepting something we are unhappy with. I couldn't disagree any more. I'd rather be part of something that I believe in.

Winning an election is less important to me than changing the way we govern and allow our citizens to participate in democracy. But of course, if the latter is done properly, the former should take care of itself.

AuthorChris LaBossiere | Comment12 Comments |
tagged , , , in ,
Page 1 2 3 4 ... 4 Next 5 Entries »