Welcome to the Panel of Foregone Conclusions

Dear Committee Members:

Greetings and welcome to the new panel on foregone conclusions!

In the interests of open government, designed to improve transparency and ensure better collaboration between government and citizens, the Alberta government is pleased to accept your participation in the upcoming [panel/review/roundtable/online survey/consultation/submission-based engagement] based on your [cronyism/neoliberal ideology/donations to the party/blind loyalty/unwavering devotion to the petrostate].

Thank you for providing your input in the area of [finance/education/healthcare/food services/policing/building construction/municipal governance/addictions/automobile insurance/fisheries/agriculture/energy/the arts/mental health/crime/the hours of the day/condo boards/employment standards and wages].

Recognizing that while Albertans pay the lowest taxes in Canada, they pay the most for public services while getting the worst results, and furthermore acknowledging that rules and regulations stand in the way of economic progress, and also reminding the world that Alberta is open for business, and by that we mean anything the public sector does, the private sector can do- if not better, then at least cheaper, and if not cheaper, most importantly for profit- and further accepting that Alberta has a spending problem, not a revenue problem, and reminding Albertans that the government has a mandate to save Alberta from the evils of socialism, we ask that you provide input into this initiative using your [specialized expertise/jurisdictional research/globally endorsed best practices/selected previous engagement feedback /clever writing skills/impeccable reputation] all completely devoid of any ideological interference on the part of the current government and the political party it represents.

Your participation will help inform potential changes to [legislation/policy/regulations/public sector/overall way of life for all citizens] that are expected to be introduced in the [spring/summer/fall/winter of 2020/at some unforeseeable date].

Talking points may include any of the following: 

• Albertans have told us that…
• We need to get rid of inefficiencies
• Motherhood statements
• References to the Alberta Advantage
• Glorification of our energy based economy
• Eliminating waste will lead to a reduction of our already absurdly high taxes
• We don’t need more stinking rules
• Reducing red tape will encourage investment
• Propose something something that already exists but state it in such a way that it sounds like a new idea
• Turn one group against another
• Say the government is really NOT going to do something it has never done anyway
• Remind people the previous government created unsustainable debt that will cripple the lives of their grandchildren so now we can’t afford government services
• State that the actions of the previous government were ideologically based. Whatever the panel recommends isn’t.
• Something something foreign funded European environmentalists

Recommendations

• Include in your final report a couple of unpopular suggestions that we will immediately admit are great but promise not to implement which will soften people up when you…
• Further propose a whole bunch of stuff that changes the fundamental nature of the province including…
• Passing responsibility for the impact of underfunding onto municipal government and elected and appointed boards
• So many reductions in public services that people will cry out for privatization
• And a lack of regulations so profound that it will be like we have no rules at all
• Then, just so the public knows we are still “listening”…
• Propose more public engagement in the form of [round table discussions held only in major cities to which only selected people are invited/online surveys that are worded to provide the results that further our agenda/ask people to submit online feedback to which we won’t respond]

We look forward to working with you in this important initiative that will restore confidence in Alberta’s economy and make life better for (some) Albertans and thank you once again for your service to the people of the great province of Alberta.

Sincerely,

The Government of Alberta

P.S. You do not have to pretend you are listening to all Albertans, that is our job.

cc.

1.     Curriculum Advisory Panel
2.     Auto insurance reform
3.     Skills for jobs task force
4.     Blue Ribbon Panel on Alberta’s Finances
5.     Minimum wage expert panel
6.     Vision for student learning engagement
7.     Choice in Education
8.     Photo Radar in Alberta
9.      Fair Deal Panel
10.   AHS Advisory Review
11.  Glenora Building-Former Royal Alberta Museum
12.  Mental Health Act Engagement
13.   Red Tape Reduction Panel
14.  Tobacco and smoking reduction review
15.  City Charter Engagement
16.  Food regulation engagement
17.  Condominium rules consultation
18.  Mental health and addictions
19.  Fisheries engagement
20.  Alberta Energy Review
21.  Arts Professions Act Engagement
22.  Daylight saving time engagement
23.  Employment standards engagement
24.  Farmer led research engagement
25.  Road testing engagement
26.  Rural crime engagement

Rules, Morality, and the Place You Call Home

“How do you know the difference between right and wrong?” A question that comes up from time to time in the classroom.

Some kids will tell you they know the difference because they know they will get punished if they do the wrong thing. Some will say they know something is wrong because it’s against the law or against the rules. 

Others say they know the difference because that’s what the Bible or the Quran or the Talmud or Buddha teaches. They might say it’s what their parents taught them or it comes from some fundamental principles that guide them. Others might refer to the little voice inside their head that makes them feel guilty or ashamed- similar to Abraham Lincoln’s statement, “When I do good I feel good, when I do bad I feel bad, and that's my religion.”

For kids with less sophisticated thinking, we must push a little harder for them to understand not just the social contract, but the difference between morality and legislation. Something isn’t wrong because it’s against the law. It’s wrong because it goes against the moral fabric of society. Right and wrong speak to the choices we make that demonstrate respect for each other so we can live well together. Without those morals, right and wrong are just a matter of what we can get away with.

When I was a naïve university student, one of my profs assigned a paper on discipline in the classroom. In my innocence, I expounded at length on how I, as a teacher, would encourage students to internalize the rules so discipline would not be needed. Students would understand what was right and wrong and act accordingly. Although my prof liked the paper, in the real world of the classroom it did not take me too long to figure out how ignorant I was. Even for those who have a strong moral code, the temptation offered by doing the wrong thing is hard to resist. A laugh from your buddy or the promise of a high mark can make a lot of kids ignore both the rules and their principles.

“I did not break any rules,” says Jason Kenney of his expense claims for “primary” residency in his mother’s basement in her assisted living facility which reportedly does not accept sublets. A basement he visited four times in a given year.

Probably not Jason's wallpaper,, but then again.

“The primary residence is occupied by the Member more often than the other residence,” the guidelines say. “The primary residence is where the Member most frequently resides on weekends and holidays.”

Mr. Kenney apparently did not consider the reasons behind the rules governing residency-rules that were created to allow elected officials -both federally and provincially-to retain a home in their riding while living where the legislature sits without undue hardship. These rules were designed on the principle of fairness. If your home is in your riding in Neerlandia or Stettler but you need to spend a large portion of your time on government business in Ottawa or Edmonton, is it fair to pay accommodations costs in both communities when your counterpart who lives near the legislature only needs one home?

My own MLA and my MP retain primary residences in their home communities. Their homes, where their families live and to which they return whenever possible.

Mr. Kenney said in his statement, “I was afforded the same living allowance that all MPs get for accommodation in Ottawa. All was in line with House of Commons policy, and my principal residence remained in Calgary throughout.”  Like a kid who says "everyone is doing it" as an excuse for misbehaving.

“I owe them everything,” says Mr. Kenney of his parents. Sure. Millions of Canadians would agree. Many of us would love the chance to spend time with our parents if only we could. And plenty of us have lived in our parents’ basement, myself included. All three of my adult kids have furnished rooms in my house, filled with their stuff. They are welcome to return any day. But that's not their home. That's not where they have chosen to make a life. But all of that is beside the point. The point is, most of us don’t use our relationship with our parents to make money off the taxpayer.

“Following my father’s passing, my mother moved into a detached bungalow unit that is part of a retirement community,” Mr. Kenney has said. “Not wanting to leave my widowed mother entirely alone, I also rented the finished basement of the bungalow so that I could assist her and provide company while in Calgary.”

I don't question his love for his mom or his desire to spend time with her. Paying her rent is something he could certainly afford to do as a senior cabinet minister who earned over three million dollars while in office. I also understand that as a senior cabinet minister there were many demands on his time that might preclude visits "home". But claiming a room in this seldom-visited basement in retirement community as his “home” seems like a stretch.

I won't deny there are many definitions of "home".  A traditional bungalow you share with your family, a little apartment you share with a pet, a fancy condo you barely see due to the demands of your job, a  house on a reserve without access to clean drinking water-all of these can be "homes." Places you sleep in, places where you hang your clothes and keep your mementos and your family photos. Not places you visit a few times a year.

The irony is not lost on me that Mr. Kenney and his former comrade Derek Fildebrandt were both former directors of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, the euphemistically named organization to which few taxpayers belong. Two men who made careers out of complaining about  abuse of taxpayers' dollars and then, once they were elected to office, turned around and abused those same dollars themselves.  But at least when Mr. Fildebrandt was caught out regarding the fact he rented out his taxpayer funded accommodations as an AirBNB, he owned up to his error. 

Thinking you didn't do anything wrong because you didn't break the rules is the kind of immature thinking I can accept from a high school student. Saying "everyone else is doing it" or using other excuses is also something I have come to expect from kids. But I don't accept it from an adult who aspires to lead. A man who may soon be making the rules.

I don't think Kenney's "rental" of his mom's basement is a scandal. I don't think it has anything to do with whether he is really an Albertan. I don't care if he lives with his mom on his off days, but he shouldn't be disingenuous about it. That's not his primary residence. That's not where his life is.  When a man who chooses to ignore right and wrong in favour of his own self-interest, that concerns me.

Probably not Jason Kenney's kitchen.

Ideologies are for other people

Jason Kenney and Brian Jean like to say the policies of the NDP are "ideologically driven".

They say the word "ideology" like it's a dirty word. Something only bad people have.

As if their socially and fiscally conservative ideas are not part of an ideology.

What they really mean is that they prefer that conservative set of beliefs over those that are more progressive.

Ideologies are not in and of themselves, evil. Everyone has an ideology. Everyone has a set of beliefs about the nature of humanity that informs their views about how society should operate. Unless your intellectual functioning is so low that you are unable to construct abstract thoughts, you have an ideology.  Brian Jean has an ideology. Jason Kenney has an ideology. They are lying if they say only the NDP operates based on ideological principles.

An ideology is defined as "a system of ideas and ideals, especially one that forms the basis of economic or political theory and policy." How on earth could the United Conservative Party NOT have an ideology? 

In today's Social Studies programme of studies in Alberta (created when Ralph Klein was premier) students learn that ideologies are based on interpretations of history, beliefs about human nature, beliefs about the structure of society and visions for the future.  We may not all have thought deeply about these issues, but we all have core beliefs that inform our ideas. And based on those ideas, we formulate what we think is the best way forward for ourselves and our society. And then we vote.

What is your interpretation of history? If you are an aboriginal person in Canada, your interpretation of Canada's history will not be the same as mine. Your view of colonialism will be one of oppression and injustice and betrayal. For people like me, the perspective will be more about the opportunities that led to a good life for generations of my family. Mr. Kenney's interpretation of our history seems to be that it began when the first white man set foot on our shores. It's about venerating a past based on land appropriation and unfulfilled promises. Kenney believes colonialism is a "politically correct theme" and that the glorification of our military is of greater importance than other, more painful aspects of our past. 

What are your thoughts about human nature? Are people intrinsically selfish and greedy and therefore need to be controlled? Or is there a human desire to do the right thing so that we can all live well together? Are most people lazy? Are all cultures and genders equal? Or are some more deserving than others?  Those ideas impact the platform and policy of every political party and government, including our former PC government, the NDP, the Alberta Liberal Party, the Alberta Party and the United Conservative Party. 
How should society be structured?  Should there be social classes? Should the rich help pay for services to the poor? Should there be few rules and limited taxation and correspondingly few government services? User-pay own healthcare and education? Or a larger role for government where everyone pays in and everyone benefits? The UCP has clear ideas about the structure of society-ideas that are the very foundation of their party.

Question from a recent survey from Brian Jean.

And what about visions for the future? What should it look like? A multicultural land where there are equal opportunities for all, or a land for "old stock" Canadians? Should a government try to go backwards in time to "Make Alberta Great" again? Or should it move boldly forward to a new future that includes everyone, including our aboriginal people? Will it be a place where the price of oil magically increases, providing employment and government revenue? Or a place where we have created alternative employment opportunities for a prosperous future? 

Having an ideology doesn't make you a bad person. Admitting you have one just makes you honest.

The Dangers of Self Interest

Yesterday Derek Fildebrandt resigned from the UCP Caucus.

The 31 year old Fildebrandt is known for his fiery outbursts as much as his libertarian values and his criticism of government regulations. The former Alberta Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation which ironically advocates for greater government accountability, was found to have rented out his taxpayer-subsided accommodations, double dipped on expense accounts, and claimed a housing allowance for an apartment he shared with a co-worker. He is currently charged with a hit and run accident in his condo parking lot.

In a statement ripe with irony Mr. Fildebrandt kinda sorta accepts responsibility for his actions.

I have worked for more than a year to help create the United Conservative Party, because Alberta needs a new government that can fight for the common-sense priorities of regular people.

During the fight for unification I said that we must put Alberta before our party, and before ourselves.

This young party cannot afford to be distracted from the formative period that it is in right now as we come together as conservatives. I owe that to my colleagues, my party members, my constituents, and all Albertans.

Right now, media controversy is distracting from the work that must be done as the UCP is founded. The UCP Leadership race should be focused on issues of leadership and values, and not on personalities.

I have made honest mistakes – always doing what I believed was best at the time – and I accept responsibility, and am truly sorry.

Honest mistakes? 

You can make a mistake once but when you keep making them, it's a pattern of behaviour. Not a mistake.

Leadership?

This is a man whose own website states he has consistently stood for free speech and personal responsibility yet blames the media instead of himself as his reason to quit caucus. The same free press that somehow implies he is a victim by calling him both "embattled" and "beleaguered" instead of a man whose errors are of his own making. 

Values? 

This is a man who called for a wage freeze for all  government employees and scorned an increase in the minimum wage while earning more than $138,000 a year as an MLA.

This is a man who "led the fight against the abuse of taxpayers’ money" yet has now abused that same taxpayer dollar to line his own pockets.

A man who instead of initially taking  responsibility for his actions, claimed  there was a smear campaign against him- a juvenile response that  indicates he feels "it's only wrong if you get caught." 

Fildebrandt is a self-proclaimed conservative and libertarian. He believes in acting in self interest but his also believes there should be very few regulations governing human behaviour. 

If the ideologies of conservatism and libertarianism are combined, all citizens require a moral compass to guide their actions. If that moral compass does not exist, laws must be in place.  Unfortunately, Mr. Fildebrandt has demonstrated that those laws must be detailed as the "letter of the law" is not enough. Apparently, for people like him, it needs to be spelled out that you cannot claim the same expense twice. It needs to be explained that you cannot receive a housing allowance and then rent out that same accommodation for profit.  You cannot share an apartment with a colleague and then both claim it as an expense.

His actions clearly exemplify the flaws in his ideology. If one is encouraged to act in self-interest, how do we preserve the common good? If we maximize personal autonomy, how do we protect society from those who choose to bend the rules? 

Mr. Fildebrandt may have left the caucus, but the ideology he espouses remains. 

Grow up Jason Kenney

July 29, 2017

At Kenney's "special" event today, he announced his formal intention to seek the leadership of the UCP.

He also took the opportunity to fire some shots at Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, suggesting Trudeau should not use Canada's 150th as an opportunity to apologize for Canada's past.

Setting aside the fact Trudeau is Canada's PM and Kenney has his sights on being Alberta's  premier, let's look at Canada's past.

Is it 100% something to be proud of?

When our first Prime Minister Sir John A. MacDonald deliberately reneged on the Crown's obligations under Treaty 6 and 7- to provide for First Nations people in times of famine-should Canada celebrate that little piece of our past? The Pass System? The 60's Scoop? Should we continue to ignore the intergenerational impacts of residential schools? The fact many First Nations communities don't have potable water? The suicide rates, at epidemic proportions in many indigenous communities? The unconscionable rates of murdered and missing aboriginal women? Should those legacies of Canada's colonial past be ignored as we demonstrate "gratitude" for those who "built our great country"?

Look, I'm as "old stock Canadian" as Mr. Kenney. My roots as an Albertan go back much further than his. I am proud of my ancestors. But I am not blind. I am not willfully ignorant. Why? Because I am a grown up.

A grown up can keep two things in his or her mind at the same time. An acknowledgement of the errors of our past and pride in our accomplishments. As a parent, I admit I made mistakes raising my kids. I can also recognize I did some things right and I am proud of their successes.  As a teacher, I know I had something to do with where my students end up, for good or ill. As a community member, I will accept some responsibility for the many ways things screw up in my town and I vow to try and make things better.

Kenney, however, prefers a view of the world that is so simplistic, it is downright comical.

Grow up, Jason Kenney.