Earl Am Canadian, Am You?

Danielle Smith and her United Conservative Party government, clearly in the thrall of their Maple MAGA behind-the-scenes leaders, have long been planning to ask Albertans, via referendum, if the province should leave Confederation. Leaving aside the question if doing so would even be constitutional, this unnecessary and divisive proposition should be fiercely rejected. 

Fortunately, former Progressive Conservative cabinet minister and MLA Thomas Lukaszuk has more sense than Smith and the UCP and has beat the provincial government to the punch with his own referendum question: 

Do you agree that Alberta should remain in Canada? 

Yes I do, and if you do too, please support the referendum here. You can donate to defray expenses, volunteer, canvas for signatures, or simply pledge to sign the petition--it needs roughly 300,000 signatures to proceed to official referendum stage, while Smith's "Let's separate!" petition will require only 177,000--because of course they changed the rules. 

Why does my title sound like Bizarro wrote it? Because we're clearly living in Bizarro World these days. Let's try to round off the corners of our square earth, bit by bit. It can start here. 

Unconscionable

Today Alberta's UCP government announced most Albertans will have to pay for COVID-19 vaccinations starting this fall.

The government claims this is because over half of Alberta's supply wasn't used over the last couple of years. This isn't surprising, since premier Smith's government has consistently downplayed the severity of COVID-19 and refuses to properly publicize the availability of COVID-19 vaccines and booster shots.

Currently, Alberta has the highest rate of measles cases (per capita) in Canada. This is what happens when a government abdicates its responsibility to debunk anti-vaxxers and instead implicitly supports anti-vax messages through its policies. 

Anti-science, anti-intellectual, anti-vax thinking has brought measles back from the brink of extinction--a disease that can cause death and permanent disability. 

Just like COVID-19. 

Sylvia and I can and will pay for our booster shots. We have that privilege. But what about the majority of Albertans, living paycheque to paycheque, who can't afford a shot expected to cost over $100? I guess they'll just have to take their chances. 

And of course this makes life even more difficult and hazardous for the small minority of people who legitimately cannot be vaccinated for health reasons. These people are usually protected by herd immunity, but Alberta's COVID-19 vaccination rate has dropped down to around 13 percent. Herd immunity requires over 90% of any given population to be vaccinated to protect those who cannot be vaccinated. 

The UCP's decision to charge people for a life-saving vaccine could very well sicken and even kill scores of people. It will likely place immense strain on our already overworked health care providers.

Unconscionable. 

Alberta Votes 2023: A Choice of Eras

About 30 minutes from the time I write this, news stations will begin to report on the results of the 2023 Alberta provincial election. This time around, Albertans are choosing between the centrist New Democratic Party led by Rachel Notley and the United Conservative Party led by Danielle Smith. 

Should Rachel Notley's NDP win, I expect a middle-of-the-road government that will attempt to shore up Alberta's public health care system, balance the needs of the oil and gas industry with our collective need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect human rights, and reinvest in public education. I also expect a government reasonably free of drama and scandal. In other words, I expect something like Rachel Notley's first government term from 2015-2019. 

Should Danielle Smith's UCP win, I fully expect her government attempt to further privatize our health care, foster the ever-vocal alt-right movement in Canada, get rid of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police in favour of an Alberta police force, withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan in favour of an Alberta pension plan, slash taxes for the rich and corporations while increasing user fees for public services (including health care), and, Florida-style, attack marginalized people of all kinds through vindictive legislation. I also expect a greater-than-average level of corruption. 

Historians in the United States refer to a ten-year period from about 1815 to 1825 as the "Era of Good Feeling," renowned for its unusual optimism among the public and the political class. 

I feel like we've been in an "Era of Bad Feeling" since 2016 or so. The roots of the Trump presidency go far, far back into American history, of course, but Trump gave racists and regressive permission to say the quiet parts out loud--to openly threaten anyone not on their team, to embrace ethnocentrism and racism, and to advocate against democracy. 

I don't believe Rachel Notley's team has the power to usher in an Albertan Era of Good Feeling. I think they could deliver an Era of Relative Calm, or perhaps an Era of Hints of Better Times Ahead. 

I do believe that a UCP victory will lead to a made-in-Alberta Era of Bad Feelings. It'll be a place where the fearful and the cruel will be given outsized influence, while the thoughtful and the compassionate will have to fight to hold back the tide of regress. 

I have no idea what Albertans will choose. We'll know soon enough. 

Generation X-tinction

Last night Sylvia was out visiting Norma, so I puttered around watering the plants and trying not to choke on the wildfire smoke. This photo doesn't really do justice to the terrible air quality.
 

This one comes closer, though. My frame of mind is pretty pessimistic these days, what with <gestures at everything>. As I was shooting some photos of the apocalyptic sky, I thought about my own privilege, and how Generation X seems to be the last generation to have had a shot at living prosperously--that is, a lot of us own our own homes, we have well-paying jobs, and (perhaps) a chance at a decent retirement. Aside from a very lucky few, the Millennials, Gen Z, and those following have the cards stacked against them in terms of career opportunities, relatively stable government, general affordability, and so on. 

The post-war boom of the mid-20th century gave us the illusion and the expectation that generation after generation would enjoy more prosperity than the one preceding it. That notion has fallen apart, thanks to a tiny minority of psychopathic billionaires and their political enablers working together to hoard the planet's wealth while destroying the biosphere in the process. 

And in the midst of all this, polls still suggest that this month's provincial election is still a 50-50 race between Rachel Notley's NDP and Danielle Smith's UCP, who are hell-bent on privatizing our public institutions and reviving the coal industry even in the midst of wildfires burning down communities and poisoning our air.

What a world we've made for ourselves. 

Danielle Smith: Secret Liberal

Back in November 2006, I was almost a year into my six-and-a-half year tenure with the Alberta Liberal Caucus, then the Official Opposition. On November 30, the caucus held a Christmas open house. I took photos and the images languished in a folder for almost a decade.

But yesterday, my computer, which shuttles through my photography folder, randomly chose the above image, out of thousands of photos stretching back to the 1940s, as my wallpaper.

Hey, wait a minute, I thought. That woman on the left talking to Wade Izzard...is that...Danielle Smith? At an Alberta Liberal function?

Click on the photo for a full size image and decide for yourself if that is indeed a young Smith. Of course even if it is Ms. Smith, there's nothing nefarious about her presence at an Alberta Liberal Caucus event; it was, after all, an open house. But it does tickle my funny bone to imagine how hardcore right-wingers would react if they took this image out of context and decried Ms. Smith as a closet liberal, consorting with the likes of Bill Bonko (seen at right).

Strategic Error

I've been a strategic voter since the federal election in 1993, voting Liberal or NDP depending upon who had the best chance of defeating the Reform/Alliance/Conservative candidate. Since I started working for the province's Official Opposition, I have of course voted consistently for the Alberta Liberals - not merely out of loyalty to my employer, but because I admire and respect the three leaders I've served and their caucuses, and I support the policies they've developed over the years.

But as the Wildrose Alliance surged during the current provincial election, I had a brief moment of weakness: was it time to return to strategic voting to stop a party even worse than the provincial PCs from forming government?

Living as I do in Edmonton-Meadowlark, Dr. Raj Sherman's constituency, there was never any question that I'd be voting anything but Liberal. But in conversations with progressive friends earlier this month, I admitted that I understood the reasons why they're considering holding their noses and voting PC. Indeed, my friend Stephen has crafted a very reasonable argument to that effect.

It's an argument the panicking PCs are using themselves, pleading with progressives to vote PC in order to stave off the horrifying spectre of a Bible-beating, fiscally libertarian Wildrose administration.

I believe that a Wildrose majority would be a bad outcome for Alberta. But is it really the worst possible outcome? Should progressive Albertans sacrifice their votes for the sake of a PC government that's intimidated health care professionals and municipal officials, consistently underfunded public education, mismanaged public health care into a state of ongoing crisis, solicited and accepted illegal political contributions and exposed teachers to being sued for discussing topics some parents are uncomfortable with? Can a Wildrose government really be worse than this?

Perhaps they can. But consider the consequences if progressive voters flock to the PCs and help re-elect the Redford administration: 

1) Progressive Albertans will lose their already tiny representation in the Alberta Legislature. What a tragedy it would be to lose Laurie Blakeman, a powerful advocate for human rights and the environment. Or Raj Sherman, who risked his career and gave up the cushiest job in politics (PC backbencher) for the most thankless (Leader of the Official Opposition). Or David Swann, a man who has entered war zones to help the world's most vulnerable people. Or Rachel Notley, Kent Hehr, Brian Mason, among others who have spoken out consistently to expose PC corruption, defend vulnerable Albertans and uphold progressive values. Do we really want to sacrifice these people to keep the PCs in power?

2) We'll be sending a message to the PCs that they really can get away with anything, without consequences. Send threatening letters to municipal officials, bully doctors, pass regressive legislation, continue the slow privatization of health care - that's okay with us, because we're afraid that Danielle Smith might be even worse!

3) We'll demoralize ourselves, perhaps forever. If progressive voters give up now, how can we ever believe that one day we might elect a Liberal, NDP, or Alberta Party government - any government that's at least a little more in tune with our values? If we deny the many brave and excellent candidates running for progressive parties our support, how can we expect future progressives to step forward? Running for election is expensive and risky for progressives; I know this from personal experience, having run last time.

Maybe the Liberal or ND or Alberta Party candidate in your riding is a long shot, but doesn't he or she deserve your support if he or she truly reflects your values?

One day, a progressive party of one stripe or another will form government in Alberta. It probably won't be tomorrow, and perhaps not 2016 either. But that day will certainly never come if we vote against our own interests instead of supporting the policies and people we really believe in.

Bottled Opportunities

Having allowed our collection of empty soda bottles, cans and milk cartons to build up for several months, I decided that today would be a good day to haul them to the bottle depot.

Under grey overcast skies I pulled our little crossover into the parking lot of the west end's Centennial Bottle Depot. I nabbed a Jysk shopping cart from the depot's illicit collection and used it to transport six garbage bags full of bottles from the car to the redemption windows.

While waiting in line I noticed the usual mix of middle-class folks and homeless Albertans, the first group returning bottles out of a sense of environmental duty, the second out of economic necessity - at least if my stereotype-based assumptions were true. Such assumptions are always dangerous, of course; I didn't look terribly middle-class myself in my sweat pants and t-shirt, my typical attire for messy chores like this.

When I reached one of the redemption windows, a notice from a City of Edmonton bylaw officer taped to the wall caught my eye. It ordered the removal of all shopping carts from the premises no later than January 2010. They represented "an eyesore," according to the city. While the Centennial manager had dutifully posted the order, a herd of shopping carts remained in defiance of the municipal government's demand.

While I sympathize with the city's desire to keep Edmonton clean and neat, it struck me once again that shopping carts and abandoned bottles represent perhaps the only economic opportunity available to homeless Albertans. Bottle deposit fees, shopping carts and consumer willingness to throw cans and bottles in the garbage instead of recycling them has created an entirely new economy. Homeless Albertans take advantage of consumer laziness and spend their days collecting bottles, turning them in for dimes and quarters.

None of this is news to anyone, but it still astounds me that western culture has allowed itself to evolve to the point where our least fortunate citizens are forced to dig through garbage to earn a daily pittance. I turned in six bags of bottles today, earning about $75. It took about six months of normal consumption for Sylvia and I to generate that many empties. Perhaps an industrious homeless person might be able to collect an equivalent amount from the city's garbage containers in a day. But even if such a person could earn $100 a day, they're still risking disease and injury for an amount of money that might, barely, cover food and lodging. What a remarkably cheap way for society to pay for an essential service.

And yet we begrudge these bottle collectors even the meager dignity of this industrious pursuit. Grocery stores routinely demand quarters or loonies to unchain their shopping carts, business owners chase collectors away from their trash bins and bylaw officers sanction businesses for allowing shopping carts to accumulate. Of course businesses want to protect their property, and naturally it's in everyone's best interest to have a presentable community. But I wonder what options we're leaving for the people being left behind. For years and years Alberta's Auditor General has been begging the government to invest more in mental health services, a key factor in helping get people off the street. And yet the government response has been incredibly sluggish. And while the provincial government and Alberta's municipalities deserve kudos for the progress they've made on the ten-year plan to alleviate homelessness, we're now faced with the spectre of a government led by free-market fundamentalists, the Ayn Rand-loving Wildrose party. How will Alberta's homeless fare in an environment even further right-leaning than our current PC government?

I have a feeling Ayn Rand and Danielle Smith would probably say that homeless folks collecting bottles is merely the free market performing its magic once again. But shouldn't we aim for a society in which no one needs to rifle through garbage to earn some loose change?

Most Illogical

Earlier today Stephen directed me to this image of Wildrose Alliance Leader Danielle Smith offering the Vulcan salute in (of course) Vulcan, Alberta while on the campaign trail. "Please blog about everything wrong in this picture and caption of Danielle Smith in Vulcan," he pleaded.

Where to begin? Well, first things first: while the photo's caption claims "Danielle Smith shows she can give a Vulcan salute," she has, in fact, messed up; her thumb should be extended, not scrunched up along the blade of her hand. Other politicians are perfectly capable of giving the salute; see US President Obama saluting Spock-style just a few days ago. 

Of course no Federation citizen would hold this gaffe against Ms. Smith; that would be illogical. It's the gesture and the sentiment that are important: peace and long life, live long and prosper.

But Wildrose political philosophy runs counter to Star Trek's humanist ideals, making one wonder why Smith would associate herself, however briefly, with the show. In the world of Star Trek, we're presented with a society that is either slowly leaving capitalism behind or has already done so, depending on which of the various Trek TV series you're watching. There are no national borders on Earth, and people work not for money, but to pursue personal growth. Greed and the pursuit of money are seen as distasteful and outmoded, and universal human rights are fiercely defended. Health care is universal and fully accessible to all, based on need, not affluence. Science is held in high esteem.

Contrast that with Smith and her party, who continue to claim - for political reasons - that the science of climate change hasn't yet been proven. They believe in so-called "conscience rights" that would allow marriage commissioners to refuse to marry homosexual couples or health care professionals to refuse to give out birth control pills. Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Picard and the others would be bewildered by these philosophies, though they would certainly be tolerant of Smith's beliefs...if perhaps privately worried about the prospect of socially conservative economic libertarians being put in charge of one of Earth's most advanced jurisdictions.

In other words, what we have here is a simple case of cognitive dissonance. It's not that right-wingers shouldn't like Star Trek; it's that it's hard to imagine why they possibly would. One of these things is not like the other.

In truth, I have no idea whether or not Ms. Smith is a Star Trek fan; it's quite likely that she was simply acknowledging that the town of Vulcan is best known for the connection it's fostered with the show. Any politician stopping in Vulcan would be pretty much obliged to mug for the camera flashing that salute. But it remains ironic that the leader of a libertarian, socially conservative party would so willingly associate herself, however obliquely, with popular culture's most enduring vision of a social-democratic utopia.

'Tis the Season to be Polling

Upon returning home tonight our phone rang and I found myself answering a poll conducted by Chase Research or Chase Marketing - I didn't catch the full name. With a provincial election around the corner these polls will start to fly fast and furious, and I sometimes entertain myself by guessing whether or not the poll was commissioned by a neutral party or hired by a political party in order to push the results in directions favouring that party.

I have a feeling Chase may have been hired by the Wildrosers. I say that because in addition to asking the standard questions - "If an election were held today, would you vote for party a, party b, party c" etc. - they also asked whether or not you had favourable or unfavourable views of Premier Redford and Wildrose leader Danielle Smith. They didn't ask this question about the other party leaders. They also claimed that Premier Redford is considering raising taxes and listed a number of way she might do so. And finally, they asked whether or not the illegal contribution scandal would make you more or less likely to change your vote/make it more or less likely to vote PC, one of the Wildrose party's pet issues. (To be fair, this question might also be asked by a firm hired by the Liberals; we've been pushing the issue pretty hard too.)

Sometime in the next few days, the results of this poll will be released to the media, and more likely than not the media will provide plenty of coverage regardless of whether or not the poll was conducted legitimately. Of course my own analysis is mere conjecture, but if an average citizen like me can smell something fishy about the way these questions were asked, you'd think the fourth estate would start asking questions too.

Opposition Parties Present United Front on Health Care



Brian Mason, Sue Huff, David Swann, Raj Sherman and Danielle Smith. Photo by Andrew Fisher.

In a huge first for Alberta politics, leaders of the Alberta Liberals, NDP, Wildrose Alliance and the Alberta Party, as well as Independent MLA Dr. Raj Sherman, are calling for a full public inquiry to

"investigate whether or not health care staff and professionals were subject to intimidation, including retribution, professional or employment discipline or the threat thereof, or attacks on their character or professional reputations, in order to prevent them from speaking about issues which affect patient care or the effective delivery of health care in Alberta."

Here are the remarks Alberta Liberal Leader Dr. David Swann delivered this morning at an unprecedented all-opposition party news conference in reaction to new allegations that the provincial government punishes doctors who speak out about problems in health care.

I stand before you at a turning point in Alberta politics. The government duly elected by the people of Alberta has broken a sacred public trust. Recent developments show that Tory mismanagement of our public health care system runs deeper than most Albertans could ever have imagined.

Under unrelenting pressure from all opposition parties, the Premier has capitulated. He’ll allow the Health Quality Council of Alberta to carry out an investigation of cancer care and ER wait times.

That’s no longer good enough. Given the severity of the damning allegations coming forward late yesterday, the investigation proposed by the Premier is not enough on its own to restore public confidence in health care.

Because of the shadow cast over this government by recent developments, Albertans have no reason to trust this Tory government. There’s every reason to believe they’ll try to use the HQCA investigation to cover up their own incompetence.

If this sounds cynical, it’s because the Tories have given us every reason to be distrustful. The depth of their incompetence and dishonesty has grown so great that the Tories have brought together all opposition parties. The need is that great.

Today we speak with one powerful voice, on behalf of all Albertans who care about public health care and financial accountability.

We now demand, on behalf of the people of Alberta, a fully independent public inquiry, one completely free of government interference, control or intimidation.

Ideally, the inquiry we propose would have these features:

• Investigate whether or not health care staff and professionals were subject to intimidation, including retribution, professional or employment discipline or the threat thereof, or attacks on their character or professional reputations, in order to prevent them from speaking about issues which affect patient care or the effective delivery of health care in Alberta

• An inquiry open to the media and the public, transparent and overseen by a current or former Justice of the Crown, with total discretion as to who is called to testify and full access to any documents deemed relevant by the Justice
• A full and open public inquiry to investigate whether the Alberta government, Alberta Health Services or former regional health authorities paid any form of compensation to any person in return for their silence on the quality of health care, or lack thereof, for Alberta patients
• All witnesses relieved of any obligations pursuant to confidential and non-disclosure provisions for the purpose of giving evidence

Premier Stelmach, if you truly care about your legacy, if you really care about public health care and the lives and health of the people you lead, call this inquiry immediately. If your party has nothing to hide, you’ll come clean about your mismanagement of public health care and give our health professionals the tools they need to prevent more tragedies.

To the people of Alberta, I say to you now that we will not allow this government to escape the consequences of its mismanagement and possible corruption. We will not allow our doctors and nurses to be threatened for telling the truth. We will not allow public health care to be destroyed by incompetence and possible corruption. We will act on behalf of every Albertan who has suffered or lost a loved one needlessly.

That is our duty to you, and we will carry it out.

***

What a fascinating time to be working for the Official Opposition. Unfortunately I was stuck behind my keyboard as all this was going down, so I couldn't be at the news conference in person. They also serve who sit and type, I suppose.

Thanks my own personal experiences in the emergency room over the past couple of years, combined with everything I've seen and heard working at the Legislature, there's no question in my mind that this inquiry is necessary. We can't fix the system until we know the whole, unvarnished truth behind the surgery delays and long ER wait times. Will the Premier allow a truly independent and transparent public inquiry to go forward? I certainly hope so. It's no exaggeration at all to say that lives are at stake.

No matter what happens, I'm very proud that Alberta's opposition parties, despite striking ideological differences, came together at this important moment, proving that public health care is important to all of us. Well done, everyone.

Here's the Official Opposition release on today's event.