Cutting The PDD

Sorry for the poor quality of photos, a skill I need to work on.

Persons with Developmental Disabilities (PDD) budget cuts were announced last week by about 11 million dollars. Minister Mary Anne Jablonski is in charge of this and decided to post a blog here. The cuts may be warrented in this portfolio when you look at the fact that we increased spending by 20% to support an increase in need of only >2%. The problem however is the fact that no notice was given to the these groups that rely on the budgeted numbers.

The budget claimed was for $600 million dollars for PDD and since cuts may be necessary I have to wonder where we should make these $11 million dollars in cuts. Of course as always our GOA will look to the front line and disabled to absorb these costs, I wanted to dig a little deeper into how much is spent on boards alone. I was a little surprised when looking around at the amount we pay our deputy ministers etc.. in this department shown below:

Sorry I couldn't make this clearer but it says that it pays one deputy minister and three assistant deputy ministers a total of $1.09 million dollars. Who says the civil sector doesn't pay. After looking a little further I discovered that each region receives its PDD money and distributes it from there. I happened to stumble across Calgary regions pay for their executives which is another $720,000.00 alone as broken down below:

Now I am no accountant by any means, but in my spreadsheet below the province takes $38.9 million dollars before it is even distributed to the regions. The regional executive boards take $4.124 million in pay which seems ridiculous in a taxpayer funded duty, which is shown on the far right column. Private corporations may get away with this, but come on.

In $600 million funding to this, it appears about $43 million dollars is paid out between the province and the PDD regional executive boards. I could dive very deep into the reports and find areas to cut spending without affecting the front line, but what for, that is the job of the highly paid ministry. Near as I can tell they need look no further than their own back yard.

The Annual report can be found here.

Renew AB Liberally

Thanks to members of my last posting for informing me that Reboot AB and Renew AB were two very different causes. Renew AB is a new political movement trying to form a party. It is being toted as a progressive movement, however if you look a little deeper into who is behind it you may wonder if it is an offshoot of the Alberta Liberal Party.

Chima Nkemdirim, co-chair for Renew AB, has a much different view on what kind of Alberta than I would like to see. I definitely have have different views of who I would have in power in AB. Chima worked under Kent Hehr in buffalo for the Alberta Liberals. This wasn't the shock to me rather the statement he made Calgary-based lawyer Chima Nkemdirim: “Kevin Taft is the one leader who recognizes the unmatched potential of this province and has an action plan for reaching that potential. I’m convinced that Kevin Taft and the Alberta Liberals are ready to govern.” Yikes!

Many of the people that have chosen to support this cause have made statements on what they believe the Wildrose stands for, complained on the lack of policy, and questioned the intentions of it's leader. While the Wildrose can not pass any new policies until the next AGM their policies are not vague in comparison to Renew AB, really what party could not come up with these. It is unclear who is behind this movement and what they stand for, but from where I see things so far, the Liberal deserters have started to move. I would caution anyone looking to really take a hard look at what the agenda behind this really is. A vague policy, no openness on who is behind it, and who chairs it is enough to scare me away. They want to be ready for the next election, good luck.

Reboot-More of the same.

Todays poll results are talk of the social media today. Discontent with the Stelmach led Tories is more evident than ever, and a real option outside of the Wildrose obviously is not there.

This doesn't shock me at all, however what does shock me is the direction of the Reboot/Renew movement Ken has formed. I thought maybe new, although a more left movement would try and differentiate itself from what exists. When I look at the definition of what being a progressive person is through his eyes, this is seeming far from that type of movement.

Here is what it claims to be about, and I quote "This is not the place to debate right versus left perceptions of politics. This is not the place to personally slag politicians or personalities. This site might break news but it will undoubtedly make news." Sounds good eh. Not so fast lets look at the most recent post from Mr. Chapman. Couple of contradictions here:

"So much more needs to be known and understood about the Wildrose Alliance and in particular their social and environmental policies, principles and values."
and then:
"...WAP forms the next government you will be delegating decisions to fundamentalist, traditionalist and social conservative values throw-backs of a bygone era."

I do not think that Danielle Smith and the Wildrose Alliance has branded itself as of yet, other than we are building a fiscally responsible government. I support this fully. The Wildrose of the past is what it is, Past. The new Wildrose which has went from 1000 active members to over 14000 active members will define the party at the next AGM. This has to wait until then due to the Party bylaws binding it's policies to be set by it's members. Using the last election platform is ridiculous. Calling us a bunch of So-cons is hilarious considering who won the leadership and her stance on divisive issues, beating out both of the socially conservative hopefuls by 7 to 1.

Seems to me Mr. Chapman thinks he knows and understands it all. The Wildrose is nothing what Ken cracks it up to be and undermines Albertans that are engaging and getting involved in a party that they will have a place in forming. Kind of confirming that the people that are supporting the Wildrose at the moment are not welcome in this progressive party. A very unwise move. I do hope that the Reboot AB takes off, gets it's 8000 signatures, develops sound policy, and defines itself. It is a very long hard road that will require huge amounts of money to implement. People such as the ones criticizing the Wildrose will also criticize this new formation, make no mistake about it. Will it be so bold as to decline it's corporate donation side if and oil company name is on the cheque? Will it accept only "Green Money"? Will it stop people at the door from joining if they are too conservative for it's liking? How many will be allowed to join if their views are not "towing the line"? All questions regarding the Wildrose will also be pointed to Reboot so remember that as you move forward.

I am not slamming Ken and the Reboot movement, in fact quite the opposite. I feel anyone willing to step up and stand up for what they believe is a great thing to be commended. There has been good discussion and new ideas brought forward, there is also much discussion that is left to be desired. This will happen in anything political where if you intend to form government, you will have a diverse group with a different view on the best way forward. These are important considerations to make if a new movement is planned-Remember you are branding your party now before you have members. Good luck to you all-I do wish you the best in your movement.

From where I stand right now Reboot is more of the same.

PC Kool-Aid Anyone?

Yesterday in the Herald, the Wildrose and it's leader stirred up some more controversy regarding what role Alberta and Canada should play at Copenhagen. Criticism by all of the other party's in the Legislature followed quickly, not too surprising. What I took out of this was not whether Wildrose is right or wrong on global warming, but the fact they were not willing to commit to anything without having concrete facts to base them on. Is a made in AB solution really a bad thing to implement, after all we need to be part of the solution. The other parties seem to think we simply sign on a binding deal, with no clue on what the impacts are that come with it.

We already committed $2B to CCS to our government preferred companies in Alberta, why not look at other options such as eliminating coal generated power and using our abundant supply of natural gas, it is cleaner burning and has a way smaller environmental footprint than a mine. The reason we do not have more generation going this route is simple, it is not cost effective in comparison. I touched on this with Mel Knight at the PC AGM this year, which he confirmed coal was cheaper by far. When I pointed out the difference in royalties between coal and natural gas, and if the royalties charged for power generation were equal, it would be comparable in cost. Pretty simple way to clean up pollutants at no cost to our government, because the royalties would be the same as if they burnt coal. Mel said it would simply never happen. Oilsand producers are working frantically to clean up their emissions, as much as the public thinks they don't care, they understand the importance of emissions as well as the public relations that come along with it. Micro generation, geo-thermal, and the many other new technologies available can also make AB a leader in the world stage for environmental improvements. Allowing our fate to be held in the hands of Global leaders for me is not an option.

Danielle Smith, thank you for looking out for us. This move not only differentiates your party from the same old thing, but show that you are a confident leader willing to put the province above your own political gain. Health care once you decide to roll out your platform is another of the subjects political parties are afraid to tackle. Lets face it the minute a party mentions Health Care Reform, we as Albertans go on the defence claiming any changes will wreck our system. Well everyone I hate to burst your bubble, but our health care is not adequate nor is it sustainable. I hope for once a party will stand up and make the difficult but necessary changes to improve our system and ensure it will be available for many years to come, the same old tired PC tinkering is killing it.

The PC party is pulling out all the stops to try and stop the bleeding form their party. Release of the "Fiscal Four" now grown to the "Save the Party Seven" is simply a stunt. All of a sudden the PC party comes up with 10% of their party that disagree with the direction? Hahaha, how stupid do you think Albertans are? These are not new MLA's that have come into the party with a goal of improving things, thay are the same members that have been there since the last election. The same members that voted on the fiscal bills, Bill 44, Bill 19, Bill 50, bill 36, horribly ran the children's and youth services, failed on the H1N1 roll out, made AB an unfavorable place to invest, changed laws to enable deficits, gave themselves huge pay raises, pay themselves for caucus meetings, and run a record deficit! If they think that by not showing up to vote on the issues as with Bill 50 it makes them hold the GOA accountable, they are wrong. The media may like the idea of these tactics, some of the public may buy in as well, but most Albertans see through your job saving measures.

I for one am tired of these games the PC Government plays, and you? PC Kool-Aid anyone?

Schindlers List

Recently an independent report, which Dr. Schindler was part of, was released regarding what impact the oilsands were playing on the watershed. The PNAS report author compared the amount of fallout to an annual oil spill. Talk about exaggerating a point.

There is surely no denying there is an environmental impact to whatever we as humans do, but to what degree is what we need to figure out. The time frame that this science was compiled in is not enough to convince me of the real numbers a science should generate, however after climate gate our scientist will receive alot more skepticism. Being that the oilsands are a surface oil, there was not testing done prior to development, and a short time frame for tests leave me less than convinced at the degree of impact they have.

This brings me to the next topic being the Copenhagen talks. The main focus is on global warming and the GHG emissions. We as a country are expected to commit to reducing them, based on what is what I would like to know. If we are to believe Dr. Schindler on his Oilsands report, should we also not trust his judgement on GHG and global warming? Here is his comment " everyone knows global temp has been flat for 10 yrs" on Rutherford on Dec 8. So what is the intended goal? CO2 is necessary for life, is there too much? After all greenhouses pump it in because it makes the plants thrive. We use it in Cola, sandwich and meat packaging, etc.. Would I sign a binding agreement based on this unproven theory? Never, and I hope our government doesn't either until we have proper information, agreed upon by proof, not a bunch of people looking for funds for their universities gain.

Once again Mason and Dr. Swann are quick to jump to conclusions . Mason alleging Smith is a denier of climate change, Dr. Swann wanting to ensure we follow the lead of the Obama government doesn't show much leadership to me.

"The science isn't settled," Smith said. "If we're going to embark on this path, we've got to be darn sure that the science makes sense." Forward looking is something that has lacked in our GOA for far too long.

Financial Planning & Fighting with the Wife

Dan was a single guy living at home with his father and working in the family business.

When he found out he was going to inherit a fortune when his sickly father died, he decided he needed a wife with which to share his fortune. One evening at an investment meeting he spotted the most beautiful woman he had ever seen. Her natural beauty took his breath away. "I may look like just an ordinary man," he said to her, but in just a few years, my father will die, and I'll inherit $200 million."

Impressed, the woman obtained his business card and three days later, she became his stepmother. Women are so much better at financial planning than men.

My wife and I were sitting at a table at my high school reunion, and I kept staring at a drunken lady swigging her drink as she sat alone at a nearby table.

My wife asked, 'Do you know her?'

'Yes,' I sighed, 'She's my old girlfriend. I understand she took to drinking right after we split up those many years ago, and I hear she hasn't been sober since.'

'MyGod!' says my wife, 'Who would think a person could go on celebrating that long?'

And then the fight started.....

My Thoughts on the #RebootAB Movement

Over the weekend a progressive group assembled in Red Deer, AB for a meeting of the minds on how to make AB a better place. I did not attend but here is my take on it from what I have read, by all means I hope the many that attended can correct me on my perception.

First I will start off by explaining why I did not attend the meeting. I felt that the views of what progressive means outlined prior to the meeting were a) WAP members were not progressive b) if you are conservative you can not be progressive c) you need to buy into the green oil kool-aid and d) need to believe there is no other options available. None of this was said or confirmed, just my feelings on it as it was rolled out as I fell into much of the criticized categories.

Many of the bloggers I admire and respect were in attendance, which when compared to them I am somewhat of a political hack. There was huge support for another upstart party with a progressive movement that will listen to the people. Geez, I have never heard that before, kind of sounds like the same thing every political party has said since the beginning of time. This time will be different though I am sure. Some of the members have already excluded many that may have followed a movement like this, so for me I think it will remain a stalled movement. Many of the bloggers that I have followed over the years have so much to offer in terms of ideas and knowledge, but it is much easier to be a pundit than to run a province with such a diverse set of views. Bill 44 was a huge part of the push for a few of the attendants of Reboot, however it would be quite interesting to see how many Albertans actually support this bill (as we all know I am not one).

I do hope a political party is formed out of this, as I for one think we need a balance of all types. The ALP has not been an effective opposition and the NDP simply protests all ideas good or bad. The Wildrose Alliance has so much work yet to be completed to become a government in waiting, they have yet to be recognized. Progressiveness is linked to being socially liberal, but I believe in simply being socially responsible with little interference in Albertans lives. The more bills and laws that keep coming forward restrict our freedoms and add a huge amount of cost as well. Maybe with a progressive group working hard on the left/center and a party working on right centre we could force good government in the end, who knows.

What Reboot AB has done for me is confirm I am on the right path to bring about political change to our province. I will continue working with the Wildrose Alliance. We have all listened to the attacks from these same members that criticize the Wildrose for having no substance on their policy. We also know that the Wildrose Policies are set by it's members. The party in June of this year had 1200 active members which has swelled to 14,000. We have a leader that is a remarkable speaker and media savvy. We have the perfect set for bringing change into Alberta politics, and here is why I believe this:

1. Since it is agreed our policy lacks substance and is set by it's members, by having a diverse group of members we will put forward common sense policy. We as a party can easily elaborate on the policies to include members of all political leanings much easier than trying to start up a party that concentrates only on a progressive view.
2. We still have the opportunity to brand ourselves, before we are branded by everyone else as we roll out our policy platform.
3. We are already an established political party recognized a a serious political threat, growing in strength by bringing in even more diverse membership base.
4. A strong leader with a remarkable memory for policy and ability to speak without putting her feet in her mouth.

As I mentioned I think the Reboot movement is a great progressive movement, however in our province you will never form a government without being big tent. This is proven when we look at the history of politics in our province. The ALP and the NDP were never able to gain traction because of the choice to be left. The PC party remained because they were known to be fiscally conservative and socially progressive, unfortunately I don't see that they stand for either any longer, staying in power is the only goal.

My option for the Wildrose is simple and the party could use people from the progressive movement to help set up good policy. The same from all poltical stripes. There is a huge opportunity to brand this party as simply responsible both fiscally and socially. The membership in the party is still small enough to grow big tent and decide policy to include the majority of Albertans and not limit itself to conservative, progressive, liberal, etc... In the end I see the Wildrose party as being what was presented at reboot AB only on an all inclusive scale. The DJ Kelly post had a significant part in changing my thoughts, showing how common sense politics can be. Thanks to all involved at RebootAB as you have brought on a change in my way of thinking as well. I have spent far too long criticizing a party we all see the problems with. I will be blogging on the strengths of the Wildrose, discussing the policies and what can be bettered, bring them forward at the AGM, and work hard to bring in a variety of members to ensure the party indeed is "Big Tent" with a variety of ideas. I see this as the fastest and easiest way to bring change about. I don't think Alberta needs to re-boot, maybe simply an update. ;) Look forward to your comments Rebooters.

Is Lindsay Blackett Racist? Don't be Ridiculous.

I came across an opinion column in the Sherwood Park -Strathcona County News that was well...utterly the worst informed article I have ever read. People that read this will lose brain cells, so be careful. I think the timing of Catherine Griwkowsky's opinion may be to take advantage of the Stephan Carter blunder, with a very narrow view of basic human rights, the HRC or law in general. Obvious is that she may be better as a ranting blogger than a columnist.

I am not too sure if anyone can remember Lindsay Blacketts interview with Rick Bell in the Sun, but his views on the AHRC were right in line with the Wildrose Alliance. Do these comments by Mr. Blackett mean he would like to have a KKK meeting on his block as mentioned by this ranter?

"People have the right to say what they believe and Albertans strongly believe in that right," says Lindsay.
"We've got to try and find what was the purpose of the human rights commission to start with back in 1972."
"For me, it's back to the future and the simplicity of what the human rights commissions is supposed to be. It was originally just intended to provide protection against discrimination on grounds of race, colour, creed, religion and so on with respect to employment, accommodation and access to services. That's it."
"It wasn't about hurt feelings. The reason a lot of human rights commissions are disrespected across the country is because they've forgotten that.
"We want the commission to be a quasi-judicial body that has some teeth, that has some credibility but doesn't operate like a kangaroo court."
..."People shouldn't feel they can't come to Canada, like a university professor who talks about a subject matter and then there are reprisals," says the cabinet minister.
"They should have the ability to say what they say and somebody should have their ability to have the counter argument. That is what a free and open society does. Let's get away from trying to mediate everybody's feelings."
Lindsay talks about being turned down by a girl at a school dance with all his pals watching.
"You feel about two inches tall. I guess maybe I should have taken her to the Human Rights Commission because I had hurt feelings. Where does it end?"
"We haven't talked about it at caucus or cabinet yet, but I've already gone through a few steps. Generally there's support, the support to make a change and do something and not just sit back and say because it's a tough subject we should stay away from it.
"I don't think provisions for more freedom of speech are a problem. I think people on both sides of the political spectrum appreciate it."

No of course not. Maybe she would like to insinuate Mr. Blackett thinks South Africa had the right idea with signs demanding racial segregation in public areas were the right idea. I doubt this too.

The reasoning for getting rid of section three is simple. It is the grey area open to interpretation and the abuse of the system. As Lindsay Blackett referred to AHRC and it "operating as a kangaroo court." We have laws in place already, the duplication and above the law view by the AHRC is unnecessary. Debate can only happen if one person disagrees or is offended by a statement, and we should not be scared of such. Section three has had negative effects on both media and personal beliefs. We could look at Ezra Levant or Rev. Boissoin.


Randy Hillier, along with fellow PC MPP Lisa Macleod, have been leading the charge to reform Ontario's HRCs. Hillier made the abolition of Ontario's human rights commission part of his campaign platform. Didn't stop at a certain section, Damn Racists? Give it up.


Catherine Griwkowsky it is obvious you know nothing about the HRC or its abuse of power. Maybe try to raise your bar of journalism before you write by doing even the slightest of research on a topic. As for the paper I am shock at the level of idiocy you allow in your publications. If you take the time to complete your research (or start it) you will find that we already have laws in place to protect us from what you refer to, but again you have done no research. What a shame.

For more information on the HRC, their bullying, and censorship I suggest reading the material at Ezra Levants website.

As Voltaire reputedly said, “I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Update: Johnathon Denis as well?

Motion 518

It would appear that Mr. Greg Weadick, MLA for Lethbridge-West, put forward motion 518 in the legislature. The bill is:

"Be it resolved that the Legislative Assembly urge the Government to consider exempting seniors from paying the education portion of property taxes." The motion was agreed to on November 23, 2009 in the legislature.

For sure now I will be confusing Lethbridge east and west for which party is represented.

I realize that the senior citizens in Alberta have paid and continue to pay their dues in our province. This being said they also continue to use the many services provided by the province, including health care. With our provincial population aging this should not be a motion we want to put forward. I will be a senior here one day and will gladly pay my part in keeping our health care and education intact. The education tax portion of our property taxes are thrown into general revenues, and only make up for 20% +- of our education budget. We are looking at massive cuts to the education system in the province and dissolving more revenues is not realistic. How many more cuts can our GOA expect our education system to make.

Not too long ago we eliminated the fees paid into our health care system, and to no surprise the coverage in our province changed. Many have said they would have preferred to keep the premiums and not make the cuts to the system. We are now running huge deficits in the system. Education is the backbone of Alberta's future, so I do have concerns when it comes to affecting the outcomes of this system.

Seniors in Alberta have many things subsidized by the province, and we are looking towards more in terms of assisted living etc.. I won't disagree as a province we have an obligation to do so. However the theory that dues have been paid in full is a misleading comment by this MLA. Seniors also enjoy the improvements made in Alberta on a daily basis, should they be exempt from paying? The claim that those in assisted living do not have to pay this tax is not quite true. If they pay the taxes are included in the fees charged to our seniors. To be fair then should a single person or couple with no children pay this tax? Should I have to cover my share in seniors health care costs? Of course, taxes should be a level playing field regardless of age, race, religion etc... up to and including usage.

I believe that this motion is simply a vote buying measure in the legislature. What MLA would not agree on this from fear of losing the seniors votes? This is at the cost of our youth which will be paying the tab for years to come as our population ages. The government underestimating the importance of Education in our province needs to stop.

Right now much of the youth may not be taking the time to cast a ballot, remember this will change.

Tweeting Da Premier

On Friday it seems Danielle Smiths senior advisor, Stephan Carter made these comments on twitter:
"Just saw da premier making a speech. Dat was quite a speech. Dem media better report it right,"
"Getting ready for press conference. Dem media better be ready for Danielle. Dey better get da story right!"

It appears the office of the premier thought they were offensive so Stephan called the premier's office and apologized as well as took them down. I would guess immediately the premiers office placed the following twitter:
"My press office has accepted an apology from Danielle Smith's chief of staff over an offensive Twitter post."

Well if an apology to the premier's office amounts to this I am thinking Stephan should have just let it ride. The media and twitter were in a frenzy over the tweets that had no comments made until after the premier's office released it had accepted an apology. The noble indeed. Only an issue after an apology. Why? This is quite simple, no one thought it was offensive until Tom Olsen put the spin on it. His ridiculous claims of this being a slur against the Ukrainian culture or rural people. To me Mr. Olsen is the one who was being discriminatory, I took it for what it was, a slam on Ed Stelmach and his inability to speak. This however is the way of Alberta politics now, and realistically any other party(including the WRA) may have done the same.

This also turned into an issue with the Wildrose Alliance Party. The PC faithful were quick to jump on the bandwagon, blaming the party and continuously trying to put the spin on it. Danielle made these statements to the Calgary Herald:

“It’s really unacceptable," Smith added. "I think we want to try to bring a higher level of discussion to politics and that’s certainly not the kind of discussion that I tolerate or that I would expect to see from people who work for me. He understands that. It’s been made clear, and I’m glad that he responded as swiftly as he did.”

Asked whether there will be any repercussions for his job with the Wildrose Alliance, Smith noted Carter is her strategist and on contract until the end of the year. She said he was interim chief of staff for a few weeks, but has been a strategist since early November. The chief of staff position is vacant.

“Obviously I’ll have to gauge that,” she said. “His quick reaction and his quick acknowledgment that he made a mistake, I think that to me that’s enough at the moment.”

In short I guess the PC's can dish it but can't take it. Stelmach attacked Mason on his career as a bus driver in the legislature. Elniski made very distasteful comments about 12 year old children (female) washing cars for a fundraiser. Iris Evans slammed and insulted families that out of necessity with the cost of living in Alberta, required both parents work in order to make ends meet. Luke Oulette was in contempt of court with the children and youth services. Ron Liepert failed miserably in his bid to roll out the H1N1 vaccine. A ridiculous deficit....and so on.

An advisor to Smith mocking the Premier and his ability to speak may be distasteful, but I will take it to these. In all fairness the Wildrose has had much good publicity, this is not an attack by the media, they are simply treating the Party the same as any other. I would put money that Ed Stelmach doesn't even know he was offended, unless your naive enough to believe he does his own social media.

The high road would have been better for sure, but it nice to see we are on the PC radar.