Friday, March 12, 2010

Are We Competitive Yet?

Yesterday the Government of Alberta released their findings on the competitiveness review. The project committee released the final technical report on Alberta’s Natural Gas & Conventional Oil investment competitiveness to the Alberta Department of Energy on February 16, 2010...but was this needed?

When we go back to 2007 when Ed Stelmach's tories opened this can of worms, it was done much the same way as Bill 44, Bill 50, Bill 36, and Bill 19. No consultation with anyone outside of the usual blue ribbon panels. When Ed decided he would review the royalties, he spun the report with the title of "Our Fair Share", which of course convinced many Albertans that we indeed were not collecting enough for our resources. What he failed to mention was that one of the mandates was to cool the superheated economy, which unless you read the report you would not know. Was this a success? You be the judge, thousands of jobs were lost, many businesses closed their doors, and equipment and capital fled the province. Did we collect more in royalties? From the graph below showing the lowest royalty take since 1999 I would say this also was a failure.


In 2007 the goal was to increase the take of royalties for the province. Industry was outraged, immediately telling the government that the take was too much. They warned the Stelmach regime that if the Royalties were implemented in full form they would take their investment elsewhere. Many meetings with Mel Knight and the Premier ensued with the energy companies and investment community. They scolded the government over this move, affirming they would invest their money elsewhere. The service sector of Alberta's energy industry also cried foul, telling the government this move was a bad one. When the oilfield workers went to the legislature to speak their concerns regarding the implementation of the report, they spoke of job losses, investment dollars and the amount contributed to the Alberta budget. No GOA officials were there to speak outside of the Alberta Alliance parties sole MLA Paul Hinman. Many Albertans were also outraged that the GOA had been shortchanging them by an estimated $2 Billion dollars a year on lost royalties. Claiming the energy industry and investment community was bluffing, making the simple statement of where else could they go. There at this point was no winning for Ed Stelmach, with an election soon looming he had to decide on what to do.

With the title of "Our Fair Share" on the review panels report, many Albertans felt a certain entitlement to more of a royalty take. Shortly after Ed released his version titled "New Royalty Framework" or the NRF as we now refer to it. This was a framework that took slightly less than the original recommendations, but in the eyes of industry players was unacceptable. Almost immediately capital left and 15-20 percent of the service sector lost their jobs. Equipment started moving as well with the state of the art equipment following the work to the US and neighboring provinces. Ed however maintained he was serving Albertans needs, stating he had struck the right balance. The NDP and Liberals maintaining he had sold out Albertans, and the Alliance saying this would be a disaster. The writ was dropped and an election ensued in March of 2008 in which Ed Stelmach and his tories won a staggering majority of 72 seats. The Liberals managed to hang on to 9 seats, the NDP 2 seats, and the Wildrose Alliance lost their only seat.

After the election in 2008 land sales were recording their worst ever numbers in decades. The investment for drilling oil and gas wells in Alberta had came to a crawl. B.C. and Sask. were posting some of the best numbers in their history. The provinces were enjoying the interest and activity the oil and gas sector provided, with many saying it was Ed Stelmach to thank. The government realized it needed to act after polls showed Alberta was now a bad place to invest. Over the next year and a half the Stelmach tories tinkered with royalties 6 different times to no avail. Industry had lost confidence in the government and with the constant royalty adjustments it was impossible to look at long term investments. In the meantime an economic recession had moved in, that gripped much of the world. Oil and gas pricing collapsed, and plunged Alberta into record deficit numbers, forcing them to look at draining the sustainability fund. During the recession the shale gas plays in BC and the U.S. suffered modestly, while Alberta came to a standstill. Oil prices crept up over the next year to manageable levels which help cushion the blow in Alberta's economic forecast, but natural gas remained at low levels. Wildrose won a seat in the Glenmore by-election with the platform of "Send Ed A Message". Polls were released with the Wildrose showing significant gains politically on the Stelmach tories, causing him to try and stop the bleeding support from the PC party. Two PC Mla's also crossed the floor to the Wildrose and a cabinet shuffle was done placing Ron Liepert as energy minister to try and woo back the energy players. Bill 1, or the competitiveness review was announced with the information coming out March 12, 2010. The final curves will not be released until May 2010, but with the amount of input the energy sector had in the new royalty framework, I am sure it will be satisfactory to them providing he signs it in blood.

The next question will be where does this leave the Wildrose. Were they a one trick pony, or will they continue to gain support of Albertans? Either way without them the government would not have been pushed to reevaluate themselves and the way they conducted business. In the last couple of years whether it be Health Care, Landowners, Education, or the economy, the PC party has managed to in one way or the other to have Albertans questioning their logic. For me the PC party will remain as a government in need of replacing, for steering Alberta into one of the worst positions economically it has ever saw. Much the same as the NEP brought in by the federal government years ago. So Ed, since the numbers won't be released until May, and this is the 6th to 7th round of changing royalties-Are we competitive yet??

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Can I Be a Deputy Minister?

Since my post on the PDD I have become increasingly interested in the amount we spend on administration in our Alberta government. There has been a lot of hype raised about MLA pay and how it is structured lately. While I agree that reform is needed in how the scale is set, I do not believe these people we elected to run our province are over compensated.

In my research I was shocked and appalled to see that the deputy ministers in fact make far more than the actual ministers themselves. Though it may not be the right way to look at this, the only way I know how is to compare it to the private sector. If I am running the corporation as president and have 196 employees that answer to me, I would be at a compensation level above all of those under me. In our GOA this is not the case, in fact the deputy minister for the executive council earned a whopping $531,587.00 in 2009 according to the FYE statements. The deputy minister in International and Intergovernmental Relations also earns over a half million at a whopping $533,812.00. Executive council must be a very important group since they spend the most. It is almost enough to make you sick to your stomach, none of the people I know in the civil sector earn close to this amount of money.

If you look at the spreadsheet there are 194 of these types of positions combined in the ministries, in which $45,807,982.00 is paid out to them. The average wage comes to a mind boggling $236,123.62 each. While the opposition is playing around, trying to chase down salaries that MLA's make to run the province, the real money is flying out right under their noses. We as Albertans deserve to know what the criteria is for these positions, who appoints them, and are they done on a partisanship basis. Hopefully a party will step up and ask these questions.

Until then, can anyone tell me how I can get hired on as a deputy minister?

Monday, March 8, 2010

An Evening With Sarah Palin

On Saturday evening Sarah Palin visited Calgary, an event I decided to attend. My reasoning was simple, not because she was a devote conservative, rather to listen to her speak. With all of the media coverage in the U.S. election there was no doubt in my mind that a vice presidential candidate could not be as naive as they made her out to be.

Upon arrival I couldn't help but notice the protesters, about three young men under 20 yrs holding sign claiming Palin leads the "New World Order". Yeah whatever. Upon entrance into the event I was extremely surprised at the amount of political figures that attended from the Wildrose, PC's and MP's from the federal level. I had lot's of time to mingle with them since the event didn't get going until 6:10 and my ticket said 5:30. Finally it was time to start, I was fairly close to the back, unlike Mr. Klein who managed to get front row center stage.

Once the preamble to Sarah was done and she took her spot at the podium, I was quite shocked at how aged she looked. She started off discussing the similarities between Alaska and Canada and how both of her great grandfathers were from Canada. She also mentioned how they would cross the border to Whitehorse to receive medical treatment when they were younger. After what I felt was trying to almost sell herself as Canadian she went on to talk about Olympic Hockey and how Canada had a well deserved gold. Unlike her political run between the two U.S. parties, the U.S. should be proud of the second place finish. She up to this point was very well spoken and I looked forward to getting to a topic with some real relevance as to why I was there.

Next up was the topic of energy development. She was very well spoken on this, bringing up how if the United States continued to rely on "unfriendly regimes" it would place the U.S. in a very vulnerable position. This makes absolute sense to me, and I couldn't agree more with her. She went on to discuss how she pushed forward for the Alaskan Pipeline, and how it was awarded to a Canadian company through an open bid process, further substantiating her view on the free market, again I had to agree with her further. Where I came to disagree was on her next statement on how this pipeline was important to Alberta as well so Alaska could ship it's resources here as well. I am sure if she had done her homework she realizes that this pipeline actually would allow Alaska to compete with Alberta in supplying resources to the U.S. For those that do not understand this, she made it sound like a good thing for us as well.

She also briefly touched on environment, bringing up how the climate gate scandal had made the science of climate change seem extremely unsettled. She never spoke in depth on this topic. She also spoke on the cap and trade topic and all the negative effects that would be associated with it. Higher taxes would happen as well as numerous job losses would be the fallout. She also touched on the MSM and the role they played in the elections, stating her disappointment in the coverage. Sarah claimed they twisted what she said and unfairly attacked her family, something that was strictly off limits with the other candidates. Looking back at the coverage at the time they did make much mention of her family.

After her speech it was time for question period. I was looking forward to this and expected many good questions to be asked. This portion of the event I was hugely disappointed with. Pamela Wallin was asking the questions and there was no participation allowed for by the audience. I wouldn't even call it question period but rather a conversation with Wallin, much like watching the puffball questions tossed around the legislature by the PC party in QP. This part of the event could have been cut out for all the good it did.

All in all the event was good, well planned, and had an excellent turnout. The seating was fairly cramped, but outside of that and the fact no pictures were allowed, it was worth the money spent. What impression did she leave me with? I can say she is more well spoken than made out to be in the media. She has a good understanding of needs and democracy, conservative values, and how to build prosperity. Is she ready for a run for the presidency? I don't think so yet, however if she can keep up with speaking to public and media she will be. Advice for her would be allow questions from the floor, reporters, and critics. If she truly wants to run, she needs to answer to the critics, not puffball questions from Wallin.

Everyone has compared Danielle Smith to Sarah Palin in the past. Make no mistake that I think Danielle is not only a better speaker than Sarah, but is not afraid to be asked the hard questions. They may share some of the same views on whether the science is settled, good energy policy, and free market enterprise, but when it comes to explaining the reasoning behind these views Danielle wins hands down. I would have to say it was worth it to see Palin, and look forward to seeing Anne Coulter and Ezra Levant .