Thursday, November 12, 2009

PC AGM Wrap Up

After the economy resolutions I decided to head outside where I ran into Hector Goudreau. I have had discussions with Hector about reforming our EI for Alberta. In May this year I provided about a 20 page report showing how much extra we as a province contribute to the system, and at the time had the least amount of returns. In June I received a response that the Premier was working on it, which I was sure to point out the ball had been dropped.

We dived into a discussion about the employment numbers released a day prior showing the unemployed rate of 7.4% in Alberta. I don't believe these are accurate number because of the amount of self employed and contractors in our province. Hector is a very personable guy, although I am not too sure he takes the position of employment minister serious enough. Returning back inside I bumped into Rob Anderson who didn't look overly impressed and made the comment we would talk later.

The day was almost done and time to sit for the meal. Going through the sponsor lists I had to question in the back of my mind if there are really favours done by our government in return. There were a few groups that came to mind right away.
  1. With the backtracking on the liquor tax but not the tobacco tax these were questionable in the back of my mind: Labatts, Molson Coors, Big Rock Brewery, and the Liquor Depot.
  2. With Bill 50 I wondered on TransAlta and the Capital Power Corp.
  3. Farmer subsidies? Alberta Egg Producers, Alberta Chicken Producers, Alberta Turkey Producers, Alberta Hatching Egg Producers and Alberta Milk.
  4. The Oil and Gas sector was down to Imperial Oil, Enbridge, and DOW.
  5. The others listed were WestJet, Capri Centre, Manning Diversified Forest Products, Telus and Willson Audio Visual.

As the tables started to fill up much talk of the numbers for leadership was flowing. When the number of 77.4% support was released Ed received a very loud standing ovation from the crowd. I am sure there was much relief with the number coming in where it did. It was above the 70% benchmark set by Ralph, but not so high to say the party had no recognition of the problems. A 72- 75% may have served the Party better, however this was a significant number they received. Another question that came to mind was the other 300+ that did not vote. I personally did not see anyone from the GOC there, and wondered of the ones that stayed away which way they would vote. Once the numbers wee released Ed gave a reasonable speech taking of how they are on the right path, contradicting with the important changes he would make on his schedule. The appointments were announced and I enjoyed a great Prime rib dinner.

All in all the PC AGM was a well put together event. The people were great and MLA's made themselves available. Some of the meeting rooms were small and the Resources only being available in a small room one time was a disappointment, but there was plenty of room on the others. Ed, I would say, gave some of his best speeches ever and even managed to stay on topic. The party faithful have spoken and Ed is the man to lead the party, dissent in the party ranks was over rated. I wish Ed and his party all the best in the future, but with the stay the course decision I have to work on the other options. Thats a WRAP!

10 comments:

  1. All things considered, I would say that is a pretty fair reporting. Some would say that to "stay the course" is rather "conservative", and others will say, staying the course is anything but.

    I suppose time will tell. That's where I planted my vote. All things being equal, I prefer the government to move less than more.. but we'll see. If come election time we're seeing some real improvement, particularly to our budget process and to healthcare, I'll be sure to let you know. If the "plan" seems to be failing.. well, I have an open mind is about all I'll say for now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good posts, between the information you provided and following the tweets on live gov it almsot feels like I was there.

    Sometimes I long for the days when each party actually stood for something. NDP was NDP , Liberals were Liberals and Conservatives were just that Conservatives.

    In Alberta it seemed (my opinion only) that because of the dominence of the PC party that people who wanted to serve as an MLA would choose the path most likely to succeed even if they had to sacrifice their actual viewpoints.

    Whether I agree with the Wildrose party or not does not matter but I am glad that perhaps we might get some differentiation of choices. I am tired having a PC party try to be Conservative and Liberal at the same time.

    I have posted on your blog before and you have provided feedback which I appreciated. If I remember correctly we have both lived through two booms and now living in the second recession.I do feel for some of the younger folks who have never experienced a recession before.

    What I am looking for is stability. The services provided will be funded by a stable revenue stream and the royalties can be banked for the future. Last I looked I think royalties were to be 18% of the provincial general revenue. That is like me running my house betting that I can pay some of the bills from the casino.

    ReplyDelete
  3. ..as a post-script - I would like to give points to our Premier for making a clear effort to connect with as many members as he could - causing his security detail to clearly put in a full day's work. I would have to say that the Premier was much more approachable than even Ralph in his heyday.. so, regardless of your position on his actual policy, I felt very pleased with a Premier making an effort to reach out to the "average" members of the party.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Re-Pete,
    Thanks for the comments. I agree it was much easier when the parties were defined. This being said politics have changed and our younger generation is a more progressive group. Big tent parties to have all included are a hard thing to balance unless you can strip out much of the social aspects, as thats where the majority of difference lies. As a government however they still need to be addressed. As far as member joining to further political careers, the opportunistic people will always be there, but when they sacrifice viewpoints there is no benefit.

    Rob,
    Again you make many good points. If the PC party can give clear direction on the economy and health care they will win the next election. This however has not been done for many years, something the general public knows and are watching. I agree that Ed is approachable and means well, however his advisors and topics he has concentrated on in the past year has been his downfall. His communication is poor and he is making an effort to reach out to the average members of the party, however he needs to succeed not only to party members but all Albertans. Time will tell if he can pull it off as there are many competent people to direct him if he accepts, if not as you say well...

    ReplyDelete
  5. "More progressive" is code for SOCIALIST. I can't believe how left wing this blog is.

    ReplyDelete
  6. FYI: The sponsorship of the five agricultural organizations was an effort to attract the attention of the PC government, not thank them for their support. The five commodities mentioned are under the "supply management" umbrella - which means that they do not receive financial support on the scale of other sectors - and would appreciate the political support of the party in power, not their cash.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks for the information Christopher

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thought you might be interested in this article by Chantal Hebert, it mentions Danielle.
    http://www.thestar.com/news/insight/article/725106--are-these-nine-our-leaders-in-waiting

    ReplyDelete
  9. Mentions her as "an outsider".

    ReplyDelete
  10. What we really need is a stronger version of Bill 44. I'm confident we can count on Rob Anderson to bring it forward next year to protect our children.

    ReplyDelete