Live stream of the Alberta’s future conference in Edmonton

Liveblogging the opening panel of the Manning Centre Alberta Future conference.

Panelists:
Danielle Smith, leader of the Wildrose Alliance Party
Kyle Fawcett, PC Party of Alberta MLA Calgary North-Hill

Q: technological factors in Alberta’s future

Smith: we need to figure out what our policy on CO2 is. We don’t have a coherant policy. Smith explains that science of climate change is still under debate. Smith says rest of Canada doesn’t undrstand the value of oil sands for economy and energy security. Oil sands reputation repair needs to be job #1 according to the WAP leader. Smith asks audience to consider jobs created by oilsands development. “We should be celebrating the success of the oilsands”. Smith suggests we should also be investigating green energy alternatives. New producers and energy types are jockeying for position in the new electricity grid. Smith says there is no conflict with being a hydrocarbon producer and a green energy leader.

Q: if you could write the next chapter of Alberta’s future. What would it be?

Smith: we will find maturity as a province. We assert rightful jurisdiction in confederation. Now we are refered to as part of the west or as prairie province. We must be recognized as a grown up province. Perhaps we should be looking for our own provincial pension plan. We should have our own police force. We should take control over our own immigration like Quebec. We need to lead health care reform. Quebec leads it now, Alberta leads it now. WAP is not another “west want in” movement. WAP is about restoring Alberta’s leadership in Canada.

Q: what are the most important things we need to do today for Alberta’s future

Smith: we need a natural gas strategy. Change consumer behaviour. Gas prices are low, this gives us opportunity to develop this sector vs. coal. Our job in government is to establish free market to encourage entrepreneurship. We need most competitive tax structure in Canada and even North America. On democratic reform, the current government intimidates people that meet with me. Premier’s office seems to be writing down names of people getting involved with WAP. This reflects an erosion of our democracy.

Q: Alberta’s role on the national stage. Re: fed govt’s deficit, how should we deal with the feds?

Fawcett: we’re not immune to global economic trends. When the PM meets with other heads of state he must fulfill our commitments. I know that our fed ministers are treating everyone fairly including Albertans.

Smith: 65% of Alberta’s self-identify as right of centre. Best way we can influence federal decisions is to be a good role model. Lately, our provincial government has not been one. Why are we issueing Alberta bonds and going back in debt. We must balance our budget and get our spending in control first before addressing the federal government.

Fawcett: we are not running an operational deficit. We are spending money from when times were good. We don’t need to cut and slash but run on longterm wise fiscal management.

Smith: Alberta bring in 32 billion but spending 36 billion. The amount of official deficit is understated by governement.

Q: how do we increase voter turnout?

Smith: All parties, not just two right-of-centre parties will have input. Social media also allows us to connect directly with voters. This will help improve the overall dialogue and this will cause more people to turn out.

Fawcett: we haven’t even scratched the surface with techology. (Fawcett echoes Smith’s comments on social media). But not everyone will follow online. There’s still a role for traditional means: mail and townhalls. Had a senior’s forum two weeks ago and only 3 people came out. Social media cannot address all needs. We must still reach out using other means.

Manning: technology is part of getting voters to the polls but it’s not the only way. If yoy look at past visions it was core values that connected with people. You must ask, what are the core valuies that fill out your policy prescriptions. Not just a technological fix, but core values must inform policy to get more people out to the polls.

Smith: people come to Alberta because of leadership in policy. Alberta Advantage was about economic growth, best delivery of services.

Q: what kind of story do you find most resonates with Albertans

Smith: my grandfather came from the Ukraine. I was surprised to see that a story of my hard working immigrant grandfather resonated more in urban areas than rural. Alberta is a place where immigrants can realize their entrepreneurial dream. We need a governement that believes in individuals to govern themselves.

Fawcett: I hear stories of people born and raised in Alberta. I hear that they’re very proud to have achieved success in the province. To persue your own vision and dreams without govt standing in the way and then helpimg your own individuals. We must have equality of opportunity for Albertans to achieve their own vision, and for those that can’t we need to give them a hand up. Story is about achieving individual success and taking that to help your community.

Smith: I think it used to be that way. Now people are looking elsewhere. People aren’t looking to PC Party to respect property rights and democracy. This is why other parties are seeing new interest from Albertans.

Fawcett: we can’t govern off of public opinion polls. We’ve earned an outstanding mandate from the people. How can it be said that we’ve lost the support of Albertans?

Q: what would you say to someone that hasn’t wanted to get involved with either of your parties?

Fawcett: if you’re upset, get involved. Find your passion and get involved where you can make the best change.

Smith: in leadership race, I was surprised by new people who were never involved in politics, getting involved. We kept selling memberships after leadership race was over. This doesn’t usually happen. People are now seeing that we can do better. If not to replace government but to elect an effective opposition to ask uncomfortable questions to the government.

Q: oilsands. How do we improve alberta’s position ethically, economically, internationally with respect to the oilsands?

Smith: some Canadians feel that Canada’s reputation is damaged and that oilsands blight is not their fault. Ottawa wants to make oilsands reputation management a national priority. This is a mistake. Oilsands are a national jewel. Oilsands are not well understood by many Canadians. Immense amount of tech being developed to improve efficiency of oil extraction from oilsands. Why aren’t we talking about this? We should be talking about how we’re improve environmental sustainability of oilsands.

Fawcett: we hope Danielle and her caucus will support the premier when he sells the oilsands internationally. Buisiness also has a role in getting the story out. I hope Danielle is not advocating for cuts in the ministry of the environment. We can talk about natual gas all we want but we cannot put all of our eggs in one basket. Albertans should not be ashamed for taking the lead on economic development and environmental sustainability of oilsands. Technological innovation may well take us to bring our emissions on par with other extraction methods.

Smith: Carbon capture and storage will be a massive sinkhole for government spending. We don’t seem talk about reductions in CO2, we only talk about reducing rate of growth. Simple measures will bring us the furthest: consumer action on home reno, auto efficiency choices.

Q: what do we do about selling our “dirty oil” as some in the US put it?

Smith: one solution on talking about emissions with US may come from honest discussion about US decommissioning coal plants.

Q: what makes an Albertan? What makes us the same and what makes us different?

Smith: “every fiscal issue has a social dimension.” Albertans more disposed to looking to community issues to solve public policy problem. Some think that paying taxes will solve problems. We’re seeing that paying taxes do not provide services. Education and health are suffering because more people are looking to government to solve their problems.

Fawcett: agree with Danielle that solutions come from communities but definition of community has changed. Consider urban condo dweller. Is there community there as we have traditionally defined it?

Smith: we must consider outputs vs outcomes. Government focuses on outputs. We need to focus on outcomes. Found agreement with NDP activist on community involvement. Community connections are vital. Community doesn’t break down in urban environment, it is actually more important. Social media allows us to connect but we must still meet each other eye to eye.

Q: what is the role of society? What is the role of government? What does the “good life” mean?

Fawcett: the society that we want is the one that strikes the right balance. Where would we be without government involvement in the oilsands? Not that we should encourage more government encroachment, but we need to be more strategic. We need to be having more conversations like we’re having here this weekend? Where do we want Alberta to be in 20 years? We need find the vision and implementation strategy moving forward. This comes from individuals and collective society.

Smith: we must acknowledge that we’re a young province. We have every right to look at our next century as optimistically as we saw the last. You can avoid making public policy missteps by looking to the governments to increase liberty and freedom. Libertarians and social conservatives believe that governement has gotten to big for its own good. Stong families and communities are foundation of society. We cannot look to government to solve each problem. Must invest in infrastructure to increase economic growth. Our first objectives as MLAs is to “do no harm”

Alberta bound

I’ll be heading to Edmonton tomorrow for the Manning Centre’s Conference on Alberta’s Future where registrants will discuss and evaluate Alberta’s performance in the Canadian and global contexts.

The conference comes on the heels of the Stelmach government’s Throne Speech today and when renewed calls for increased opposition time in Question Period have been vocalized by both the NDP and Wildrose Alliance Parties. Leader of the latter party, Danielle Smith has confirmed her attendance at the conference so it will be interesting to hear her take on Alberta’s future now, especially now that she’s leading in the polls and may well have been Alberta’s next premier if an election were held today.

There will also be representatives from the government there to discuss their vision as well as members of the other opposition parties. Preston Manning wrote an article published in the National Post today suggesting that Alberta’s PC dynasty is on shaky ground. Alberta observers will remember that Manning was courted by many Alberta conservatives to replace Premier Klein. Yet, in the end, Ed Stelmach was selected.

Alberta, partly due to the economic downturn, finds itself in different financial shape as the province’s treasury faces deficits instead of surpluses. Still the economic engine of Canada thanks in large part to its still booming energy sector, Alberta’s future and potential political turnover is the sleeper story in Canadian politics.

If you’ll be in Edmonton this weekend, I hope that I’ll see you at the conference. If not, I’ll be doing my best to file video and blog reports with those that have shaped Alberta’s past and those shaping its future.

What the Conservatives might say about Ignatieff and abortion

The Prime Minister at the World Economic Forum last week announced an initiative to put the health of mothers and children on the agenda at the G8 conference this summer.

Instead of cheering or at least giving an approving nod to a laudable policy topic, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff decided to make a rare pronouncement on policy. This time it was about abortion of all things.

Abortion has been a topic that is scantly discussed and rarely debated, if at all, within the realm of public policy in the last couple of decades. How it has come up now, represents an objectionable political goal for Michael Ignatieff. The Liberal leader is looking for a wedge.

To respond to politics, the Conservatives should consider responding politically. In this case, to neutralize the issue. Many Canadians feel strongly about the topic, but nothing but failure (for both sides) can come from playing politics with the issue.

Here’s what the Conservatives might say about Michael Ignatieff’s flirtation with abortion policy,

“Mr. Ignatieff doesn’t seem to realize that in the past 34 years, we Canadians closed the divisive debate on abortion in this country. This topic has split families and the debate has caused heartache for countless Canadians. We are saddened by Mr. Ignatieff’s attempt to reopen the topic for discussion and to callously use the philosophical debate over life and the exercise of reproductive rights as a political football to be tossed about carelessly.

Mr. Ignatieff we’ve moved past this. We will not allow you to bring the American-style politics of abortion to this country as a wedge issue to divide Canadians.

Canadians that we’re consulting these days are concerned about jobs and the economic recovery. While Mr. Ignatieff wants to hold university style seminar discussions about abortion, we’re focused on phase II of our Economic Action Plan.”

It should also be noted that the only leadership of any party to try and reopen the debate on abortion in recent memory has been that of the Liberal Party, mostly as a wedge issue to imply that the Conservatives have a hidden agenda on social issues. If merely revisiting the Canadian abortion debate is a slippery slope for pro-choice activists, why applaud Liberals when they keep bringing it up and condemn Conservatives for their non-agitation on the issue?

In reality, this move by Ignatieff reflects desperation. The abortion maneuver by Liberals is always done when the Liberals have nothing left to talk about. In this case, the Conservatives should deprive Ignatieff of oxygen on the issue and ignore it completely for the cheap attempt that it is.