May 2015 Provincial Election Thread v2

[CaptainCrunch]

Its a hard column to read, especially since it wasn't one written in the Sun, but written in the more centric to left Herald.

But he's absolutely right on a few major points.

Notley has to forget her ideology at this point and forget the term NDP, but I doubt she can. This is a woman that delayed a bad budget because it would harm Mulcair's chances. This is a leader that allowed NDP MLA's to go and campaign in BC for the BC NDP while jobs were being lost. This is a leader that actively went and helped raised money for the anti-oil Ontario NDP party.

Realistically she's only really made one good decision and that was to not change the royalty rates, however she did incredible harm to the province and the industries confidence by dragging out the obvious.

She's held onto Ceci for way to long, he's incompetent in the finance file, and nobody believes that he has the slightest clue in terms of what he's doing.

Since Trudeau left here, he delivered the money promised to this province by Harper and the really nothing stabilization fund. Since then he's done his best to ignore or bury any discussions about helping this province.

Someone on this board asked me the question of what good a fight would do because it hadn't worked in the past. However at this point, Notley has to be asking the question every day of the Feds, when are you going to do something about the EI extension, when are you going to start talking about our industry and the pipelines that we need.

Every day, Notley needs to be basically talking to, cajoling and reminding the other provinces that this province matters, and to quit kicking us when we're down.

When Trudeau's old man tried to destroy this province, the Premier woke up and fought that jerk (and he was a jerk) every single day. He made it his mandate to scrap, and argue and embarrass the federal government and make them understand that this province matters.

Now its Notley's turn, and if she can't get into this fight, then she needs to resign, its that simple.

I know that she's got a majority government, but frankly if she has a spec of integrity, she needs to look at what she's doing and decide if she can get off of her own agenda and fight. If she can't then don't spend 3 more years doing irreparable harm, and then follow it with the NDP's reduction to rump party status.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You know, it'd be a lot easier to take the opposition seriously if there were ever any constructive criticism or alternative ideas proposed. Instead we get a bunch of "adults" throwing temper tantrums. I'm fully on board with going after the NDP for their failures, but how about establishing yourself as a viable alternative. Where is the WRP's shadow budget? What are their plans for fixing unemployment in the province? How about the PCs? The only party that actually seems to be putting out alternatives is the Alberta Party.

I guess if oil doesn't recover at least there will be a booming salt industry to fall back on.

You keep saying this Rube and with all due respect, that's not how the opposition works and you know it.

The oppositions job is not to campaign and create shadow budgets and talk about how to fix un-employment. That literally happens during an election.

The oppositions job is to call attention to the failings of the government, call attention to the bad policies. and the terrible decisions that the government is making.

Thomas Mulcair federally never platforms when he's in opposition, his job is to ask questions and poke holes and criticize. Trudeau when he was in opposition never came up with a shadow budget, nor plans to improve employment.

BTW I think that Wildrose used to promote Shadow Budgets and other things like that and it got little to no traction.

Its not the oppositions job to govern and create policy. Its their job to be in opposition to what the government is doing.

Why would they want to give away their election platform?

[Handsome B. Wonderful]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You know, it'd be a lot easier to take the opposition seriously if there were ever any constructive criticism

This isn't grade 4. It's not the opposition's job to make the NDP feel good.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

You keep saying this Rube and with all due respect, that's not how the opposition works and you know it.

The oppositions job is not to campaign and create shadow budgets and talk about how to fix un-employment. That literally happens during an election.

The oppositions job is to call attention to the failings of the government, call attention to the bad policies. and the terrible decisions that the government is making.

Thomas Mulcair federally never platforms when he's in opposition, his job is to ask questions and poke holes and criticize. Trudeau when he was in opposition never came up with a shadow budget, nor plans to improve employment.

BTW I think that Wildrose used to promote Shadow Budgets and other things like that and it got little to no traction.

Its not the oppositions job to govern and create policy. Its their job to be in opposition to what the government is doing.

Why would they want to give away their election platform?

I'm not solely pinning this on the WRP or the PCs. It's an obnoxious trend that we're seeing in politics as a whole. It's not like there isn't a history of parties doing shadow budgets or proposing alternative policies either. It's one of the things I liked about the Reform and Canadian Alliance in the 90s and early 00s.

There's also another way of thinking about and that is if the WRP or PCs have a better plan than the NDP and they're sitting on it until the next election, what does that say about their priorities, that they're more concerned about getting elected than getting Albertans back to work? Isn't this exactly what people are harping on the NDP for? I get that the likelihood of either party getting any of their proposals passed is slim to none but is there not some sort of moral obligation there? I'm being a bit facetious, but if one of the opposition parties came up with a cure for cancer, would we think it reasonable of them to wait until they were elected to release it?

Like I said, it's not really a criticism of the WRP and PCs specifically, but the sad state of politics in general.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Handsome B. Wonderful

This isn't grade 4. It's not the opposition's job to make the NDP feel good.

Pretty simplistic take on constructive criticism.

[CaptainCrunch]

I think that any concepts of niceties or constructive politics went out the window when the NDP rammed through the farm safety bill, and according to reports by all of the opposition parties, basically laughed in the faces of the opposition.

This government has to be cooperative if it wants a productive relationship with the opposition.

As it stands, Notley is coming across as a bigger meglomaniac then Redman. On the plus side she's less corrupt, on the negative side of things, not as smart.

Personally, I want my opposition parties acting as critics to what the government is doing, I want them to keep me informed on flaws and issues and not just sit there and blanket vote for or against things.

I want them to fight and claw the government all the way.

I don't have an expectation of the opposition working collaboratively with the government, because it basically would bite them in the a%% in an election.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Like I said, it's not really a criticism of the WRP and PCs specifically, but the sad state of politics in general.

That is a rather shallow argument given you used a newspaper's opinion column as a launch pad to attack the WRP and PCs rather than challenge the opinion of the columnust. Trying to hold back the punch now doesn't really change much.

I would also point out that said opinion column did offer both constructive criticism and an alternative: That Notley realize her primary job is to work for Albertans rather than the NDP, and to adjust her priorities appropriately.

[Slava]

I don't know which party in opposition has handled the Greenway byelection worse. The PCs appointed a candidate and then held a vote. Crazy to see them flip-flop on this in a matter of days. Then yesterday the Alberta Party announced that they were not running anyone there as they are preparing for 2019. So bizarre. How can you be considered a government or opposition in waiting when you aren't even fielding candidates? Or maybe that's better than running a candidate and getting like 2-3% of the vote.

[peter12]

I actually agree with rube. He's right. I appreciate brainy, and virtuous opposition. We all should.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I think that any concepts of niceties or constructive politics went out the window when the NDP rammed through the farm safety bill, and according to reports by all of the opposition parties, basically laughed in the faces of the opposition.

This government has to be cooperative if it wants a productive relationship with the opposition.

As it stands, Notley is coming across as a bigger meglomaniac then Redman. On the plus side she's less corrupt, on the negative side of things, not as smart.

Personally, I want my opposition parties acting as critics to what the government is doing, I want them to keep me informed on flaws and issues and not just sit there and blanket vote for or against things.

I want them to fight and claw the government all the way.

I don't have an expectation of the opposition working collaboratively with the government, because it basically would bite them in the a%% in an election.

Man Captain, philosophically we are on different pages, but I still tend to give respect to your opinions, but this IMO is just the wrong way to look at politics, and generations of it in the US has gotten them into the hot mess they are currently in.


Is it the opposition parties' job to raise concerns, ask questions, and poke holes in the governments plans? Yes, absolutely. But in doing so, they still need to offer up alternatives to things they disagree with. You want them to fight the government all the way, well what happens if/when the government comes up with an idea that you like, that everyone likes? They are still supposed to oppose it and try their best to vote it down?

You don't expect them to work collaboratively with the government? Well then what do you expect to ever get done? It's just going to be a continuous march of "Nope, try again." "Well what would you like to change?" "Don't know, just know I hate what you're doing."

It should have sweet f*** all to do with whether or not they want to be elected 4 f***ing years from now. That includes the party in power. Nothing should be done with that in mind, absolutely nothing.

This government has to be cooperative if it wants a productive relationship with the opposition.

How can you say this and then have the exact opposite view from the opposition? The opposition doesn't have to be cooperative with the government if they want a productive relationship? Don't they want their constituents' voices heard? Or is the only thing their constituents want is to talk about how crappy everything is without offering their own solutions? How is there ever going to be compromise to try and satisfy everyone if the opposition isn't expressing what would satisfy them?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't know which party in opposition has handled the Greenway byelection worse. The PCs appointed a candidate and then held a vote. Crazy to see them flip-flop on this in a matter of days. Then yesterday the Alberta Party announced that they were not running anyone there as they are preparing for 2019. So bizarre. How can you be considered a government or opposition in waiting when you aren't even fielding candidates? Or maybe that's better than running a candidate and getting like 2-3% of the vote.

That implies to me a lack of money.

[CaptainCrunch]

The opposition is not there to make the government more electable, which is what would happen if the opposition did the government's job for it.

Yes we are on opposite pages.

If I'm in the opposition, I'm not there to make the government look better, I'm not there to do their jobs for them.

I am there as the so called opposition and voice of criticism to act as a slow down of stopping point for government policies.

The opposition isn't and really shouldn't be doing any platform work until an election.

The only time that the opposition really does anything like what you've talked about is either when they present a bill of their own, to get it on the record that its their idea, or during things like opposition days.

Hey I think it would be awesome if a private member of the opposition submitted a votible opposition budget. Of course it would be voted down, by the government in place, but it they adopted any part of the so called voted down budget then you could point to that in an election campaign.

But the oppositions job is not to prop up or help out the government in place, its to keep the public informed of what they're doing and act as a check and balance against them.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Man Captain, philosophically we are on different pages, but I still tend to give respect to your opinions, but this IMO is just the wrong way to look at politics, and generations of it in the US has gotten them into the hot mess they are currently in.


Is it the opposition parties' job to raise concerns, ask questions, and poke holes in the governments plans? Yes, absolutely. But in doing so, they still need to offer up alternatives to things they disagree with. You want them to fight the government all the way, well what happens if/when the government comes up with an idea that you like, that everyone likes? They are still supposed to oppose it and try their best to vote it down?

Not really the only time that you offer up alternatives is during an election campaign. The opposition is not there to make the government more electable. And besides the opposition does do this when they submit bills for votes because they want their names attached to any successful ones. But they're not there to consult with the government or do anything but say, your policies are flawed and wrong and this is why they are flawed and wrong.

Originally Posted by MattyC

You don't expect them to work collaboratively with the government? Well then what do you expect to ever get done? It's just going to be a continuous march of "Nope, try again." "Well what would you like to change?" "Don't know, just know I hate what you're doing."

It should have sweet f*** all to do with whether or not they want to be elected 4 f***ing years from now. That includes the party in power. Nothing should be done with that in mind, absolutely nothing.

I don't see what you're getting at, this isn't a coalition government where the opposition has a seat at the actual table. If the opposition wants to effect change they submit bills that are voted on, if they are accepted then it becomes public record that it was an opposition bill. If its rejected it becomes public record which stops the government from taking credit for it if they decide later to adopt it and take credit for it.

Lets put this into a scenario that works.

The government submits a budget that's utterly stupid. I as the loyal leader of the opposition go to the government and say, this is what I would do to fix it. The government fixes it, its a better budget. Then during the next campaign the Notley Government basically says, We your government balanced the budget or did these positive things, so 4 more years 4 more years.

So I respond with a sad "But it was my idea". To which the Notely government says, yeah we took your idea and made it a NDP solution.

Congratulations, you've just fisted your party.

Originally Posted by MattyC

How can you say this and then have the exact opposite view from the opposition? The opposition doesn't have to be cooperative with the government if they want a productive relationship? Don't they want their constituents' voices heard? Or is the only thing their constituents want is to talk about how crappy everything is without offering their own solutions? How is there ever going to be compromise to try and satisfy everyone if the opposition isn't expressing what would satisfy them?

Of course they want their constituents voices heard, and they do that by debating and submitting member bills.

But at the end of the day, the job of the opposition is two fold, to oppose, and to replace the government.

They are not the government, they are not in a coalition with the government.

they provide a key service by pointing out the flaws in the bills, the problems with the budget and the other faults of the government. But their job is not to prop up the government or act as an adviser to the government.

[Coach]

It's the responsibility of every MLA to represent the people that voted for them. To try and have their ideas put into practice. If you're in the opposition party, yes a lot of that is going to entail fundamental disagreements, but it's still their job to offer up solutions that would make their constituents happy. At some point, these people need to agree on things, and all the divisive politicking does is drive the government further apart on issues, and put wedges in between the people who support either side, when it really should be about finding out what we can agree on and getting stuff done.

So what if the NDP came out tomorrow and said they are dropping all royalty rates to zero, make corporate tax 5%, and introducing flat tax for all individuals? The opposition is suppose to just oppose that because they're the other team?

Everyone up there is supposed to be working to help make Alberta better. And you can certainly argue that Notley and the NDP may not be doing that, but are the other parties helping anything by offering nothing to the contrary? How is any sort of compromise supposed to take place in that environment? Neither side is ever going to get exactly what they want, their are always going to be bits and pieces in every policy that get negotiated on, but you still have to negotiate, and in order to do that, you have to offer your own solutions.

People voted these individuals in to represent their views, not to sit their with their fingers in their ears calling the otherside a stupid-head while offering no alternatives.

The only time that the opposition really does anything like what you've talked about is either when they present a bill of their own, to get it on the record that its their idea, or during things like opposition days.

Hey I think it would be awesome if a private member of the opposition submitted a votible opposition budget. Of course it would be voted down, by the government in place, but it they adopted any part of the so called voted down budget then you could point to that in an election campaign.

This is exactly how it should work. If they want to be electable (again, the idea that this is only reason to offer solutions personally offends me. That includes the NDP. The election is over, it's time to work together to provide solutions that help Albertans. Not their own future campaigns), shouldn't they be doing so by showing that they have good ideas, and not by trying to show how bad the other side is? Again, if you want the logical conclusion of that type of politics look to the south of us and ask yourself if that's what you want. A bunch of s*** tossing with little substance from either side except from people that many would consider radicals.

You're an intelligent person. You can't seriously rather have your team fling crap for the next 4 years than have them offer up actual solutions.

Lets put this into a scenario that works.

The government submits a budget that's utterly stupid. I as the loyal leader of the opposition go to the government and say, this is what I would do to fix it. The government fixes it, its a better budget. Then during the next campaign the Notley Government basically says, We your government balanced the budget or did these positive things, so 4 more years 4 more years.

So I respond with a sad "But it was my idea". To which the Notely government says, yeah we took your idea and made it a NDP solution.

Congratulations, you've just fisted your party.

As much as many seem to want it to be, this is not a game. Outside of the "utterly stupid" initial budget, what you described above is exactly what I would like to happen, yes. Because it's not supposed to be about what will help you get elected in 4 years, it's supposed to be about helping the people who voted for you. This type of stance actually infuriates me. This isn't a damn sport with a trophy to be won, this is public SERVICE.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

The opposition is not there to make the government more electable, which is what would happen if the opposition did the government's job for it.

Yes we are on opposite pages.

If I'm in the opposition, I'm not there to make the government look better, I'm not there to do their jobs for them.

I am there as the so called opposition and voice of criticism to act as a slow down of stopping point for government policies.

The opposition isn't and really shouldn't be doing any platform work until an election.

The only time that the opposition really does anything like what you've talked about is either when they present a bill of their own, to get it on the record that its their idea, or during things like opposition days.

Hey I think it would be awesome if a private member of the opposition submitted a votible opposition budget. Of course it would be voted down, by the government in place, but it they adopted any part of the so called voted down budget then you could point to that in an election campaign.

But the oppositions job is not to prop up or help out the government in place, its to keep the public informed of what they're doing and act as a check and balance against them.

What if they are good polices? Do you object to them because someone else came up with them?

You talk like all governments are inherently evil, and the opposition are the good guys. Obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism is a really bad idea. I'd rather the government setup checks and balances that are neutral, like the PBO to keep an eye on things and inform the public, rather than partisan bickering.

[woob]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I disagree. The desire by most Albertans to have some of the lowest taxes in the civilized world while expecting public services that are second-to-none is a huge political problem. The last politician to point out the incomparability of those two desires was vilified for it. Basically, Alberta has an extraordinarily entitled population.

It's not as though we're trying to do something unique here. There are places in the world that don't have oil, don't have royalties of any kind, and still manage to provide a decent standard of living and high quality public services to citizens.

Totally agree. I was hoping the NDP would be the ones to grow a pair and bring Alberta into the sales tax era (while cutting spending, etc.) but, like the PCs before, they don't have the guts to do it.

I wish politics/government was more about governing and doing what's best for your people/province/country rather than doing things to ensure you win the next election.

[nik-]

It's pretty funny that she's so concerned with her party brand while simultaneously ensuring that it will never be elected in this province again.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by MattyC

It's the responsibility of every MLA to represent the people that voted for them. To try and have their ideas put into practice. If you're in the opposition party, yes a lot of that is going to entail fundamental disagreements, but it's still their job to offer up solutions that would make their constituents happy. At some point, these people need to agree on things, and all the divisive politicking does is drive the government further apart on issues, and put wedges in between the people who support either side, when it really should be about finding out what we can agree on and getting stuff done.

Sure and they offer up member bills, which in turn are voted on. They also debate based on the feedback they get from their constituents. But it is not their job to get the government re-elected.

Originally Posted by MattyC

So what if the NDP came out tomorrow and said they are dropping all royalty rates to zero, make corporate tax 5%, and introducing flat tax for all individuals? The opposition is suppose to just oppose that because they're the other team?

Remember when the royalty review came out, and all of the parties came out and congratulated the government on making the right choice, and then rightfully asked the questions, why did this take so long which hurt investor confidence, and why did we bother doing it anyways.

And why didn't the government just consult with the opposition parties about doing a royalty review, instead they wasted time and money to do what the opposition parties were telling them to do all the time which is not to change them. so where was the collaboration from the governing party there?

Originally Posted by MattyC

Everyone up there is supposed to be working to help make Alberta better. And you can certainly argue that Notley and the NDP may not be doing that, but are the other parties helping anything by offering nothing to the contrary? How is any sort of compromise supposed to take place in that environment? Neither side is ever going to get exactly what they want, their are always going to be bits and pieces in every policy that get negotiated on, but you still have to negotiate, and in order to do that, you have to offer your own solutions.

This government doesn't negotiate, we've seen it on the budgets where they didn't listen to the opposition leaders prior to the budget, we saw it with the farm bills where all opposition parties bought up concerns and clarifications and change requests, and the government basically rammed it through anyways.

So under your system, the government would have to listen anyways, and give credit to the opposition parties which they will never ever do because it makes the government less electable.

Originally Posted by MattyC

People voted these individuals in to represent their views, not to sit their with their fingers in their ears calling the otherside a stupid-head while offering no alternatives.

This is your fundamental mis-understanding right here. People voted for people based on the platforms of the party, and on top of that the willingness of the person to fight based on that platform.

Originally Posted by MattyC

This is exactly how it should work. If they want to be electable (again, the idea that this is only reason to offer solutions personally offends me. That includes the NDP. The election is over, it's time to work together to provide solutions that help Albertans. Not their own future campaigns), shouldn't they be doing so by showing that they have good ideas, and not by trying to show how bad the other side is? Again, if you want the logical conclusion of that type of politics look to the south of us and ask yourself if that's what you want. A bunch of s*** tossing with little substance from either side except from people that many would consider radicals.

Then do away with the party system. Elect a leader of the house. And run elections based on the individual. And then have the leader of the house take applications from the winners for cabinet positions, and appoint a cabinet. That's what you're literally looking for is a collaborative coalition government.

Originally Posted by MattyC

You're an intelligent person. You can't seriously rather have your team fling crap for the next 4 years than have them offer up actual solutions.

That's exactly how it works.

When I consult with my MLA, or my MP which I do when I need to, it is to give my viewpoint of a piece of legislation or to make an information request for example, or fire off a concern about something that the government is doing. Now of course right now I have a pretty much invisible MLA who's a member of the government and literally gives a lot of lip service to me anyways. I much prefer to have an opposition MLA or MP at times.

And thanks for the intelligent person comment, but its clearly not true

[Coach]

So you really want the NDP to get nothing done, even if it's good things. They are to be opposed, slowed down, or outright stopped.

This is your fundamental mis-understanding right here. People voted for people based on the platforms of the party, and on top of that the willingness of the person to fight based on that platform.

What id the NDP offers legislation on an issue that is, at least in part, in alignment with the opposition party platform?

[IliketoPuck]

Matty, lets call a spade a spade.

The NDP were not voted in because their views represented the views of the general public.

They were voted in as a protest to inept/corrupt PC governance, nothing more.

Their track record thus far is ensuring a single term of 4 years is all they will have.