Wildrose Convention in Red Deer 2010

[Kjesse]

Anyone following this?

Since the NHL draft was so slow, and given that the Flames weren't involved tonight, I also streamed the feed for Danielle's speech while the draft was on. I watched most of her speech, but it was also longer than I expected and I found that as time went on her phrases sounded too much like I have heard before for my liking.

I was fairly excited about her leadership, and I'm not blaming her speech entirely for my new found lack of enthusiasm, but the longer I watched her speech tonight the more I thought that the debate about Alberta's future is not about what direction the province should go, but instead is about which individual will become the Premier, and which group of alleged 'right wingers' controls Alberta after next election. She said exactly what I would expect a candidate for the leadership of the Alberta PC's to say. In other words, its splitting hairs --- its about control --- not ideology, political philosophy, but instead, a revolt against an incompetent Premier.

Anyway, I'll take Danielle Smith as my Premier over Ed Stelmach in a heartbeat. But Ed has been forced to correct his ways due to both public outcry and internal pressure, which lessens the impact of a new party. I also expect Ed will not lead the PCs into the next election, and if so the Wildrose will have a real problem on its hands as a result.

Imagine an electoral contest between Danille Smith and the Wildrose vs. Ted Morton and PCs. In that contest Smith actually looks more socially liberal (which I prefer) while Morton has fiscal conservatism as his ace in the hole, even compared to Smith.

Wildrose has a long road ahead of it. The policies that result from this weekend's convention will go a long way toward placing them as either a real alternative to PC's, or leave them as just a clone of the PCs with a better leader... and that advantage will only prevail until Stelmach is canned.

[mykalberta]

Stelmach will be the leader for the PC durring the next election. Rural anti city arrogance of the PC party dictates that. They want to show all the "city folk mla" that they dont need them.

What they dont seem to realize is that city is where they have the advantage over the Wildrose. They should have been slowly removing seats from rural and adding seats to suburban big city voters.

I streamed most of the speech, definately long winded and pie in the sky type stuff. If the Wildrose have a chance its Smith vs Stelmach in televised debates. Look for there to be only 1 during the election as the PC have to know this.

I think the best outcome for the Wildrose is to force the PC into minority position where there is another election when they can garner more money from supporters who then think they have a legit shot. Right now they are at a severe financial disadvantage vs the PC which is why I think it would be hard to hope for anything more than forcing the PC to a minority position.

[Azure]

From what I understand the Wildrose Party has done really well with getting enough money. In fact they set records last year IIRC.

I didn't get to watch the speeches, but from reading your posts I'd venture a guess that she was being a politician tonight. Which I guess is to be expected.

Either way the Wildrose will get my vote. I'm sick of the PCs, or the way the current party runs things, and even if they change something I think they need to be kicked out to force out the big government idiots that seem to have infested a party that was relatively easy to support in the past.

It is too bad that so many people are caught up in the 'right-wing' craziness that seems to come up from the idiots down south. I think a socially liberal, financially conservative party would do well in Alberta. And I think because of our oil money a party that calls itself financially conservative could even spend a lot more than other fiscal conservatives would deem acceptable.

Hell, because so many 'social' issues are federal in nature, just about ANY socially liberal party could easily make it. They don't even have to be socially liberal. Just take a hands off approach to a lot of stuff simply because the federal government should be mandating it. I know that goes against my belief that power should be pushed to the provinces, but issues like gay marriage, abortion, education charter, health care charter need to be handled by the feds.

[nieuwy-89]

Ever since the cabinet shuffle I think things have settled down a bit in the Alberta PC party. They still have a few things to work on but my feeling is that PC support bottomed out in 2009 and has been re-building in the first half of 2010. Stelmach seems to have better control of his ministers right now, and commitments are being lived up to (e.g. Green TRIP transit funding). Things are looking up in Alberta.

I'm hearing lots of rumours that we are headed back to busy times in the oilpatch. By 2012 we might be back to "early 2000's" levels of activity. That was a good sustainable pace and would bode very well for the provincial treasury. In the meantime I think the PCs have done a good job managing the books - holding back where needed but still keeping programs going.

On the other hand, things have been very quiet on the Wildrose front. Big publicity after the leadership and byelection win, but very quiet ever since. They still have much work and organizing to do to be a viable threat. Constituency associations in all 83 constituencies would be a start, but they are not even close in most of the province. The party itself is being run by former Reform party outcasts. They may have some smart people but they are not people people if you know what I mean.

[Ashartus]

Now that their platform has been established I have to say I'm not too keen on some aspects of it; particularly more private delivery of health care and more funding for private schools (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Wi...461/story.html). Private delivery of health care is not more cost effective than properly run public delivery; our problem is that the public system is not being run well. Funding private schooling is more of a social conservative position in my opinion, not a fiscal conservative position.

While Smith may not be a social conservative, a lot of party members are. I'm not really thrilled with any of the choices for the next provincial election right now - Wildrose are a bit too far right for me, the Conservatives have been a disaster (and no party should ever be in power that long), and the Liberals have been pretty ineffective lately.

[Azure]

The only reason you're saying private schools are a social conservative position is because Catholic schools would end up getting most of the private school money.

My opinion is that if a school wants to be private, they should find funding their own way. I don't have a problem with grants and such, or even small amounts of money being given out to help out, but the government should be looking after the public system first and foremost.

That being said I do think there should be a bigger push for better private schools.

As for health care, the two-tier system has been working great in many European countries. I think we can learn something about their style of delivery.

Again, Alberta is in unique position where if we manage the cards right we can run a pretty efficient system, but still spend quite a lot of money on public services.

[Azure]

Resolutions giving Albertans the unequivocal right to own firearms and support the development of nuclear power were both defeated.

Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Wi...#ixzz0rzgfA0Ub

Booo. Yes to both accounts. Provincially we should have been considering nuclear power years ago for the oil sands.

The right to own firearms is a no-brainer to me. Provided of course that you have the proper training(which should be mandatory), background check(mandatory as well)......and license.

No registration should be required.

[GGG]

I would have to look into how the WRP are defining school choice education.

I am in favour of a system where each individual can direct the funding for their child to the school of their choice provided that school doesn't charge any additional tuition.

This allows private schools to be created which are more efficient than the public and cater to needs to available in the public system. The biggest thing this will do is break the union leading to reforms for performanced based pay rather than tenure based pay. The best example of this system is sweden where I believe up to 15% of students attend these free private schools.

The most important thing if this is implemented is to have strict curriculem controls that ensure that religious school that definately will crop up are forced to teach Evolution and other scientific theories.

[Resolute 14]

One of the funny aspects of the WRA's emergence on the big stage is the difference in how the Calgary and Edmonton papers treat the party. The Herald especially is practically cheerleading for the party, while there was an editorial in the Journal a couple days ago where the writer tried to demonize the party because no proposals were put forward on the topics of same-sex marriage, abortion and the like. He basically tried to argue that the party is extremist wackos because no "extremist wacko" policies are even being considered.

Not really related to the convention, but I love how the party basically manipulated the Tories into looking like fools on the funding issue. They forced the PC party to be the evil man by denying them full party funding even though the NDP - which doesn't represent any threat - are granted it, then automatically got the funding anyway by adding Boutiller. I'm not sure what the Tories were thinking... his joining the party at this convention has been rumoured for weeks. They played right into the WRA's hands on that one.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by GGG

I would have to look into how the WRP are defining school choice education.

I am in favour of a system where each individual can direct the funding for their child to the school of their choice provided that school doesn't charge any additional tuition.

This allows private schools to be created which are more efficient than the public and cater to needs to available in the public system. The biggest thing this will do is break the union leading to reforms for performanced based pay rather than tenure based pay. The best example of this system is sweden where I believe up to 15% of students attend these free private schools.

The most important thing if this is implemented is to have strict curriculem controls that ensure that religious school that definately will crop up are forced to teach Evolution and other scientific theories.

I don't want to be the one to stir up a huge education argument again, but I just don't see how implementing a voucher system improves education. Looking stateside, all the voucher system has really accomplished is to promote some good private schools, while severely undermining the public system.

If the government is offering public education, what kind of message are they sending, by encouraging kids to attend private schools?

Finally, I am surprised 'school choice' is even a conservative position. Since when does gov. meddling in private business represent the ideals of small government? If the gov. wanted to be really conservative, they'd do away with the public system entirely. Of course, we know the majority of parents won't shell out 14 grand a year for tuition, so that's not an option.

[Resolute 14]

By necessity, education will never really be a private business. Allowing for more options is worthwhile, but I do agree that government's focus needs to be on a strong public system.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

Now that their platform has been established I have to say I'm not too keen on some aspects of it; particularly more private delivery of health care and more funding for private schools (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Wi...461/story.html). Private delivery of health care is not more cost effective than properly run public delivery; our problem is that the public system is not being run well. Funding private schooling is more of a social conservative position in my opinion, not a fiscal conservative position.

While Smith may not be a social conservative, a lot of party members are. I'm not really thrilled with any of the choices for the next provincial election right now - Wildrose are a bit too far right for me, the Conservatives have been a disaster (and no party should ever be in power that long), and the Liberals have been pretty ineffective lately.

I'm keeping a keen eye on the Alberta Party, which is undergoing grassroots consultation with residents called the "Big Listen" as it organizes. What Alberta needs most is a party not rooted in ideology, but one that is decidedly a centrist/pragmatic political entity that is guided by the principle of seeking the best solution to the issue or problem based on best practice and a culture of innovative governance.

The statement on the front page of their website captures this sentiment well:

http://www.albertaparty.ca/

“An end to labels and politics as usual in Alberta” – Brian Thiessen

June 21st, 2010
I have spent a lot of my time in the last months explaining to friends, family and just about everyone who will listen, as to why I chose to join the Alberta Party. There is the obvious infectious enthusiasm of party spokesperson, and old friend, Chima Nkemdirim. But the real attraction of the Alberta Party is the true commitment to doing things better. A departure from the cynicism and divisiveness of partisan politics that turns Albertans off from voting. Leaving more than 60% of Albertans feeling disenfranchised and disinclined to vote in past provincial elections.

The Alberta Party starts from the premise that being centrist and progressive is the place of common ground. That working with those previously labelled as right, left, green or otherwise will allow us to find that which is common amongst Albertans. The center of the political spectrum captures most of the beliefs upon which the majority of Albertans can agree. For example, we have already discovered that we can all agree on the need for fiscal responsibility and accountability, democratic reform, better education, better health care with shorter waiting times in emergency rooms, as well as a myriad of other issues.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by bcb

Finally, I am surprised 'school choice' is even a conservative position. Since when does gov. meddling in private business represent the ideals of small government? If the gov. wanted to be really conservative, they'd do away with the public system entirely. Of course, we know the majority of parents won't shell out 14 grand a year for tuition, so that's not an option.

Agreed.

The government should focus on the public system, and almost all the funding should be directed into those coffers.

After that they can decide whether or not they want to support private or homeschooling projects.

Although I am very tempted to say private/home schooling gets to funding, and force the private system to cope by themselves.

Hell of it is, they might actually do a pretty good job.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by bcb

I don't want to be the one to stir up a huge education argument again, but I just don't see how implementing a voucher system improves education. Looking stateside, all the voucher system has really accomplished is to promote some good private schools, while severely undermining the public system.

If the government is offering public education, what kind of message are they sending, by encouraging kids to attend private schools?

Finally, I am surprised 'school choice' is even a conservative position. Since when does gov. meddling in private business represent the ideals of small government? If the gov. wanted to be really conservative, they'd do away with the public system entirely. Of course, we know the majority of parents won't shell out 14 grand a year for tuition, so that's not an option.

It improves education by forcing competition. Right now if a person is unhappy with the Public school they are assigned they don't really have much choice. They can go to the publically funded catholic system if they are baptized or shell out big dollars and go to a private school.

If the public system is the best choice then the private schools will all fail and no one will choose to go to a private one. If their are deficiencies in the Public system these will be exposed and forced to improve.

I really think that the adversarial nature between the teachers union and the province and the province and the school boards essentially prevents any real change from occurring. There just isn't the impetus for change. If schools are loosing funding and boards are loosing jobs there will be demand to change the system.

In Calgary the CBE seems to perform quite well in all of the metrics used to evaluate schools but if some schools under perform providing competition to force them to improve or be closed is a good thing.

[Ashartus]

Originally Posted by Bunk

I'm keeping a keen eye on the Alberta Party, which is undergoing grassroots consultation with residents called the "Big Listen" as it organizes. What Alberta needs most is a party not rooted in ideology, but one that is decidedly a centrist/pragmatic political entity that is guided by the principle of seeking the best solution to the issue or problem based on best practice and a culture of innovative governance.

The statement on the front page of their website

I'm hopeful too, since I'm not a huge fan of ideologically-based parties, but am not convinced they can establish enough profile to be a credible threat by the next election.

[bcb]

Originally Posted by GGG

It improves education by forcing competition. Right now if a person is unhappy with the Public school they are assigned they don't really have much choice. They can go to the publically funded catholic system if they are baptized or shell out big dollars and go to a private school.

If the public system is the best choice then the private schools will all fail and no one will choose to go to a private one. If their are deficiencies in the Public system these will be exposed and forced to improve.

I really think that the adversarial nature between the teachers union and the province and the province and the school boards essentially prevents any real change from occurring. There just isn't the impetus for change. If schools are loosing funding and boards are loosing jobs there will be demand to change the system.

In Calgary the CBE seems to perform quite well in all of the metrics used to evaluate schools but if some schools under perform providing competition to force them to improve or be closed is a good thing.

One of the best aspects with the public system in Alberta (well, at least Edm and Cgy), is that students are guaranteed a spot at their designated school; however, they may attend any public school so long as there is room.

Similarly, have you noticed the number of alternative educational settings available within the public system? The further allows choice, without compromising the system.

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

I'm hopeful too, since I'm not a huge fan of ideologically-based parties, but am not convinced they can establish enough profile to be a credible threat by the next election.

Certainly not by the upcoming 2012 election, but could if it gains momentum in the following election. I hope it supplants the Alberta Liberals in the centre, who seem to be perpetually spinning their wheels. I think Dave Taylor will probably wait and see then become more prominent within the Alberta Party movement.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by fotze

I was at this last night, totally got lucky with this one chick. Told her I was 22 and she believed it. Sucker.

The way I heard it from the chick was;

".... this guy told me he was 22. Totally let him think that I believed him."

[Pastiche]

Can I submit my proxy vote in favour of the concealed weapons motion?

[mariners_fever]

Originally Posted by Ashartus

I'm hopeful too, since I'm not a huge fan of ideologically-based parties, but am not convinced they can establish enough profile to be a credible threat by the next election.

Ummmm. There's no such thing as not being ideologically-based. Even the style of "Big Listen" where you quote-on-quote 'listen' is an ideology in and of itself.

As for creating the ability to choose schools, the classic political debate is collective equality vs. individual freedom with modern-day conservatives embodying individual freedom. Personally, I want the freedom to send my kids to whichever school I see fit. This was a possibility when I was growing up in Winnipeg, which is a far more left-wing city than anything Alberta has to offer. I chose a school based on its science program and knew it would best cultivate my talents in that regard. When my family moved to Calgary and I finished grade 11 and 12 here, no such choice was available and I was forced to go to a school with a bad reputation in that field. I could have requested to go to a school in a different zone, but the bureaucracy of the CBE made it incredibly difficult. The fear is that school choice legislation would only be beneficial for private schools. School choice works well in Manitoba is a good idea for public because it creates a competition between them and they end up offering the best in different fields as a result.