Another Random View

Should the Alberta Party Participate in the Leaders' Debate?

2012-01-25T23:23:00.003-07:00

With an election being held at some point this spring the perennial election question of which parties should participate in televised leaders' debates is rearing its head.

In the last few federal elections, and most provincial elections this question tends to revolve around whether the Green party should be participating in the debate. However this isn't the case in Alberta this time around, because the Green Party of Alberta was deregistered by Elections Alberta after failing to file financial disclosures. This time the question has to do with the Alberta Party.

For those who aren't familiar with the Alberta Party, they are a "centrist" party that basically came about after a group of dissident Alberta Liberals and red tories got together and took over the board of a small far-right political party known as the Alberta Party so that they wouldn't have to go through the usual party registration process. The Alberta Party has not come up with much in terms of concrete policy, instead claiming that they'll "listen" to Albertan's and make decisions on what their party supports along the way. They've struggled to gain much support - which is not surprising since most voters want to know what they're voting for, rather than a party that won't say how they'll govern until after they're elected. When they have been included in public opinion polls they poll somewhere between 3% and 6%, with the most recent forum poll showing them at 3% (with a 3% margin of error meaning it could be 0%).

The arguments for and against including the Alberta Party are similar to those that have been used regarding Green Party participation in debates. The percent of popular support the party has mostly counts against them at this point, unlike the federal Greens who were polling around 10% when they really started arguing to be included in debates the Alberta Party is currently polling at 3%, which puts them in the same league as the Social Credit, Alberta Separation Party and the Communist Party. Arguably if the Alberta Party is included in the debate then the So Creds, Communists and Separatists should be included as well.

Whether a party has seats in the legislature is often cited as a justification for allowing the party to participate in the leaders' debate. The Alberta Party does in fact have a seat which some would view as justification for allowing the Alberta Party to participate in the debate, but it should also be noted that the Alberta Party has never actually won a seat - the seat they possess in the legislature is held by Dave Taylor, a former Liberal MLA who left the Liberals in a huff when he wasn't given the leadership. The fact that their sole MLA is someone who crossed the floor from another party in my opinion cancels out any consideration the party should be given for having an MLA.

My personal opinion - let them in the debate, if the Communist Party, Social Credit Party and Alberta Separation party are allowed too.

*Sidenote: When I ran in 2008 the social credit candidate who was also running in the constituency was one of the most entertaining characters I've ever seen at a forum. If their leader is even half as entertaining as he was they should include him.

NDP Restores Online Convention Registration for Youth and the Unwaged

2012-01-17T19:09:00.001-07:00

And the NDP has come to their senses and restored the ability for youth and unwaged delegates to register for convention online. It's good to see that all members are being treated equitably.

Petition to End Discriminatory Convention Registration Process

2012-01-15T13:06:00.003-07:00

As many of you are now aware the party has banned youth and unwaged delegates from registering for convention online. If you weren't already aware check out my previous post on the issue here.

There is now a petition available which will be sent to party headquarters demanding that all members be able to register for convention online and that this age and income based discrimination stop. Please sign the petition here.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/end-discrimination-against-youth-and-unwaged-ndp/

NDP Adopts Discriminatory Convention Registration Process

2012-01-13T23:17:00.012-07:00

Over the Christmas break I noticed something quite odd on the registration page for the upcoming NDP leadership convention, the option for youth and unwaged delegates to register online was removed. Now a notice has been posted at the bottom of the page saying that unwaged and youth delegates must phone in to register, the problem being that the number provided only seems to work during Ontario office hours - which means that many youth, and unwaged people are being totally shut out of being able to register for convention.

You can see the registration page here: https://secure.ndp.ca/register/index.php?language=e which has the small blurb "To register as a Youth or Unwaged delegate please call 1-866-525-2555 x.6001" at the bottom of the page

I have attempted to contact the NDP using the online form on their website, Twitter and voicemail (remember the number doesn't work after hours) and have received no reply from the party or explanation for this decision. They have also not responded to questions on the official Facebook event page asking why this decision was made. It seems that the party does not want to be forthcoming when it comes to explaining their decision to discriminate against young members of the party and those who are unwaged.

I have contacted each of the leadership campaigns through Twitter and e-mail asking them to look into this manner, and asking whether they thought that discriminating against youth and the unwaged in this manner was acceptable. So far only Romeo Saganash's campaign has replied indicating that they believe that all members of the party should be treated equally and should all have the same access to convention registration (update - the Nathan Cullen campaign has now also replied saying this doesn't seem right and will be in contact with the party). Someone from Brian Topp's campaign has told me that he has attempted to contact the party but has been unable to get a reply as well.

Most disappointing of all however is the lack of response from the New Democratic Youth of Canada (NDYC). The NDYC is supposed to function as an advocate for youth within our party, but they seem to have not really responded to this at all. I let one of the NDYC co-chairs know this was happening, and they told me they would look into but I have not heard back from them regarding why youth are not being permitted to register online. It is also disappointing that it appears that the NDYC is taking no action to encourage the party to reverse this discriminatory position.

One of the co-chairs of the New Democratic Youth of Alberta (NDYA) was able to finally get someone from the leadership campaign office to respond after several attempts at contacting them. Rick Devereux attempted to justify this discrminatory practice to the NDYA co-chair by saying that they wanted to talk to all youth and unwaged people because some people had abused the discount offered to youth and unwaged people. I think this is unacceptable. All youth and all unwaged people should not be discriminated against simply because a few people who are not youth, and not unwaged people abused the process - if anything this shows that youth and the unwaged should not be discriminated against, because it is not them who are abusing the process. To make youth and unwaged people phone and beg the party (during Ontario business hours only of course) to be able to attend convention for less than $300 goes against all values that the NDP holds. I personally think that Jack Layton, who did so much to advocate on behalf of youth and the unwaged would be ashamed to know that the party is not allowing youth and the unwaged to register for convention online. Rick Devereux and anyone else involved in the decision to discriminate against these two groups should be ashamed of themselves.

I was actually likely to register at the full cost for convention because I can actually afford it (this is what I have been doing for provincial events since I completed school). However now that I know that other youth and unwaged people are being discriminated against in this manner I will definitely be only paying the youth delegate fees in protest. I will also be reconsidering any future donations to the party, because why should I donate to a party that has targeted a group I belong to for discrimination? This also leads me to ask - if the federal NDP will discriminate against these two groups in this fashion how can we trust them to not target other groups for similar discrimination in the future? Will they begin requiring members of other groups to speak to them on the phone before registering for events so they can interrogate the member and "ensure that they are actually a member of that group?"

Update January 14th - 4:15PM : Nathan Cullen (or someone on his campaign) has responded to my e-mail stating that this does not seem quite right and will be contacting the party regarding this issue.

Update: Please sign the petition demanding an end to this discriminatory practice on the part of the party http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/end-discrimination-against-youth-and-unwaged-ndp/

Current NDP Leadership Rankings

2012-01-01T15:05:00.004-07:00

This is currently how I think I'll vote. I'll provide more detailed explanations later:

1. Mulcair

2. Dewar

3/4 Saganash

3/4 Ashton

5. Topp

6. Cullen

7. Nash

8. Singh

Robert Chisholm Withdraws

2011-12-22T09:20:00.000-07:00

I believe Robert Chrisholm made the right decision in withdrawing from the leadership race. While Chrisholm has experience leading the Nova Scotia NDP that would definitely be beneficial when it comes to leading the party his lack of French was a major handicap that he admits he would not overcome by March 24th.

Being fluent in French is an essential qualification for the leader of the official opposition. While it may have been acceptable for the NDP to pick someone who was not completely fluent as the leader in the past when it was the third party this is not something they can afford now - especially when over half of the party's seats are in Quebec. While it is possible that Chrisholm could be bilingual by the time the 2015 election roles around this is not really a risk we as a party can take at this time.

The ability to speak French is one of the key areas I am struggling with when it comes to whether to give Paul Dewar the #1 spot on my ballot. I'll admit my French isn't very good, but from what I can hear when he's speaking, and from what others have told me I'm not convinced he is fluent enough in French right now. However he does seem to be functional in it - and I'm sure he'll be very good by the time the 2015 election roles around. However I'm still not completely convinced that he knows enough to serve as leader of the official opposition with a sizeable Quebec caucus yet. It sounds like his French has improved since the beginning of the race, so perhaps he'll be able to show to me by March 24th that he's ready.

Thomas Mulcair

2011-12-14T20:00:00.000-07:00

I'll admit it - Thomas Mulcair was likely near the bottom of my list when the leadership race started. However since that time I've been impressed by his campaign and his ability to connect with voters. He's now moved up to be jockeying with Paul Dewar for #1 on my ballot.

I'm particularly impressed with the stance Mulcair took near the beginning of the race advocating that all members of the party should have an equal vote in the selection of the leadership. In my view the one member one EQUAL vote method of selecting a leader is something every party should be following - and the NDP would have no excuse for picking one group and allowing them to have more votes than others (full disclosure: I'm a union member who would have benefited from having the weight of my vote increased)

Peggy Nash

2011-11-18T01:18:00.000-07:00

Peggy Nash entered the leadership race at the end of October. I can't say I was very excited about her campaign, mostly because of what happened at the 2011 Convention in Vancouver.

After delivering her report as party president Nash did not take any questions from the convention floor. When members attempted to ask questions of Nash, and later treasurer Rebecca Blaikie neither executive member readily answered questions. It took a member challenging the chair and 2/3 of the convention floor voting in favour of forcing Nash and Blaikie to answer questions on their reports to get any answers out of the two of them. In my view this lack of accountability is the last thing we need in a leader for the party.

In addition to this Nash could not be bothered to chair any part of convention - which was her duty as president of the party. If she can't be bothered to fulfill those duties, or to be accountable to the membership as the president, I don't know how should would behave as leader of the party.

Niki Ashton

2011-11-14T19:00:00.001-07:00

Niki Ashton is now in the leadership race. Ashton's candidacy is an exciting one, especially because she'll bring a youthful viewpoint to the race.

I've had the opportunity to meet Niki on a few occasions. I think she's genuine and could make a great leader someday - and a strong cabinet minister. At this point I'm not sure if she's ready to be leader of the opposition in March, or to take on Harper for prime minister in 2015, but I'll hold off on my final judgement.

Cullen's Plans for Joint Nominations

2011-11-02T17:00:00.000-06:00

I was disappointed when Nathan Cullen announced that he wanted to make joint nominations between Liberals, NDP and Greens an option in future elections if he became leader. Prior to this point Cullen was my first choice for leader.

Cullen's plan makes the mistaken vote that a Liberal would vote NDP before they vote Conservative, and that a New Democrat would vote Liberal before voting Conservative. I personally think neither of these are true. I also believe that not running a candidate in every constituency limits voters choices and is something that a serious party running for government cannot afford to do. I can understand the arguments at the provincial level in Alberta for example to not run candidates in every constituency in order to save resources (not because of the mistaken Liberals would vote NDP and vice-versa idea) but I don't agree with the party that is currently the official opposition in the Canadian parliament and is trying to be a serious contender for government taking this action. Sadly this means that Nathan is going to have to move down on my leadership list.

NDP Leadership Contenders

2011-10-17T00:55:00.000-06:00

At the Alberta NDP's Breakthrough Conference this past weekend NDYA members had the opportunity to sit down with leadership candidates Brian Topp, Nathan Cullen and Paul Dewar. All of three men were not only pleasant towards the youth at the table with them, but also towards each other - which bodes well for the three of them having to cooperate in the caucus together. I think any of these three would make a good Prime Minister.

Martin Singh and Romeo Saganash also attended the conference but were unable to attend the impromptu dinner with the youth. All of the candidates attended the Leader's Levee that evening and conference attendees had the opportunity to speak to them all.

Recently announced candidate Thomas Mulcair was unable to attend the event. Nomination forms for Peggy Nash were also floating around the conference so we can likely expect an announcement from her soon. MP Niki Ashton was also in attendance and there were rumours she would be announcing her intention to seek the leadership sometime as well.

Photo credit: Jamie Kleinsteuber

My Seat Projections

2011-04-30T15:03:00.005-06:00

Okay, just for fun I'm going to do this. I don't have some crazy scientific method of figuring it out, I just go with my gut feeling - which has varying results. Interestingly you can see from my post here which was made on Election Day in 2008 that the estimates I made for the office pool at the UofA Students' Union were only off by two seats, but the predictions I made on election day were way off.

I'm basing this off of current polling, specifically regional based polling but also taking into account that I think the NDP's numbers will climb slightly over the weekend on on election day we'll see a virtual tie between NDP and Conservative votes. The Conservatives will still win more because they'll dominate in Western Canada, especially Alberta. The NDP is going to make huge gains in Quebec as predicted by almost everyone, with huge gains also happening in Ontario and British Columbia with moderate gains in Saskatchewan (winning a total of 1-3 seats) and Alberta (wining a total of 2-3 seats).

I'm not doing regional breakdowns (or at least I'm not telling you what I got) I'm just going to give you my national total.

Also I'm predicting a short-lived small Conservative minority that will be defeated on the budget followed by an NDP minority government (or a small chance of a NDP-Liberal coalition even taking over in the first place). Either way I predict Jack Layton will be the Prime Minister, whether he serves as opposition leader for a couple months prior to it is another question.

Anyways, my completely unscientific seat count projections are:

Conservative: 128
NDP: 110
Liberals: 56

Bloc: 13
Independent: 1 (in Quebec)

Green: 0

New Democats

2011-04-27T00:52:00.002-06:00

Some silliness to distract us from the real election.

Consider supporting "Billie Blaikie and the New Democats"

NDP Surge

2011-04-22T12:01:00.007-06:00

The NDP vote is surging, especially in Quebec where all the other parties are losing support to the NDP, particularly the Bloc. The NDP is clearly ahead of both of the other federalist parties in Quebec and depending on what poll you look at they are either just behind or ahead of the Bloc.

Bloc voters are switching to the NDP? Is this surprising? Not really.

Aside from the question of sovereignty many of the Bloc's core positions are similar to the NDP's social democrat positions. With these positions the Bloc was able to attract a large number of Quebeckers who were not necessarily sovereigntists, but agreed with the Bloc in other areas. It makes sense really - federalist voters with social democratic values selected the party that represented their values that had a chance of getting elected, since sending Bloc MPs to Ottawa in itself wonuldn't result in Quebec leaving Canada.

So what's changed? Over the last few years the NDP has managed to attract voters who previously would have voted Liberal in Quebec and didn't want to vote for the sovereigntist Bloc or the Conservatives. This rise in NDP support among federalist voters, particularly since the election campaign began has manged to convince federalists who had been voting Bloc that a federalist party that reflected their personal values now actually had a chance of winning seats in the province. Seat projections based on these most recent polls put the NDP winning anywhere between 11 and 30 seats in Quebec, mostly at the expense of the Bloc.

What does this mean nationally? Well the surge in popularity in vote-rich Quebec has propelled the NDP's numbers to about the same numbers as those held by the Liberals. This increase doesn't just come from Quebec however and the NDP has seen growth in all regions - it's just most dramatic in Quebec. Seat projections based on the last few polls show the NDP ranging anywhere form maintaining their pre-election seat count to winning upwards of 80 seats and forming the Official Opposition. I'm personally more inclined to think that the NDP will pick up seats and find themselves somewhere in the 50 - 60 seat range with most of those new seats coming from Quebec, and will probably still find themselves behind the Liberals. This isn't to say that the NDP won't increase their seat totals outside of Quebec - I can see them picking up seats in Manitoba, Saskatchewan, BC and Edmonton-East in Alberta. I just don't see the NDP winning as many seats as some of the projections are showing - at least based on current voting intentions.

There's still time for change though. If the NDP manage to continue building on this momentum it's not unrealistic to see them surpassing the Liberals and forming the Official Opposition. I don't see a situation where they'll actually form government following this election. I'm fairly confident in saying that the Conservatives will win a minority (probably a reduced one) and now it's more of a question of the size of the minority and which opposition party wins the most seats.

I had my doubts going into this election. I didn't think Harper would win his majority, but I was concerned that the NDP seat count would drop in favour of the Liberals. I was wrong.

On another note, it'll be interesting to see how messaging and advertising changes now with the NDP rising. The NDP have already put out an ad that focuses on Jack Layton and what he will do. Layton consistently polls ahead of the NDP personally so the party is trying to capitalize on his image. The Conservatives have already launched a tweaked version of an earlier anti-Layton attack ad and we can expect the Liberals, Bloc and Conservatives to all switch up their messaging to attack the NDP and will likely see the Bloc and Liberals launch anti-Layton/NDP attack ads. I expect that the NDP ads for the rest of the election will be similar to their new one assuming the NDP manage to hold these new numbers or increase them and that their will be an increasing focus on Layton as leader.

Overall the last week of the election should be interesting, and I'm certainly expecting to see a more dramatic change than I though there would be going into the election.

Edit: The video is fixed. Thanks to "Skinny Dipper" for pointing out how to fix it.

Wildrose Alliance Continues Their Attack on Working People

2011-04-01T19:40:00.005-06:00

The Wildrose Alliance continued their attack on working people in Alberta today following the announcement that the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) had reached a tentative deal with the provincial government for a new contract. The new contract will provide government workers a 4% raise in 2012, a lump sum payment this year, and another in 2012 as well as providing some changes to health benefits and creating some sort of mechanism for addressing staffing shortages.

Of course the usual suspects like the Canadian Taxpayers federation are throwing a hissyfit, complaining about the government needing to limit spending, while ignoring that the wage increase government sector workers are going to receive will likely be below the increases the average employee in Alberta will see in the next couple of years.

Predictably, Wildrose Alliance Leader Danielle Smith issued a statement decrying the agreement. She complained about AUPE receiving pay increases above inflation (again ignoring the reality of the increases in Alberta Weekly Earnings over the last few years) while simultaneously claiming she was criticizing the government, not AUPE. Apparently attacking the benefits and pay provincial workers earn is not the same thing as attacking the workers themselves.

This is par for the course for a party that has made it clear that they will do everything in their power to limit the rights of working people in Alberta. Wildrose Alliance policy includes support for taking the right to strike away form public sector workers, making it harder for employees to form a union, and making it easier for employers to get out of the Worker's Compensation system. The Wildrose Alliance also advocates for the privatization of healthcare and other government services, which ultimately do not lead to savings on the governments part. Privatization leads to the government spending as much, or more as they already do with private companies (often past donors to the governing party) receiving massive profits while paying employees less than the government would have. Privatization does not save taxpayers money, it just puts taxpayer money into the pockets of companies providing the private service, while also keeping money out of the pockets of employees.

I'm not saying that government should always give unions everything they're asking for, but the agreement between AUPE and the government is more than reasonable, and probably already learning more in favour of the government than AUPE. The fact that the Wildrose Alliance is criticizing a labour deal made by a Conservative government shows just how right wing they are, and demonstrates exactly how little working people in Alberta can expect to benefit from a Wildrose Alliance government.

Is Ted Morton's Provincial Leadership Campaign Engaging in Third Party Advertising for Harper?

2011-03-26T04:34:00.008-06:00

Over the last couple days I've noticed sponsored links popping up on Facebook showing Ted Morton's support for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. These sponsored links lead to Morton's Facebook fan page.

I'm not really all that familiar with provincial and federal election finance laws, but the existence of these ads does make me wonder about a few things:

Are they being paid for by Morton himself, or his leadership campaign?

In either case, will Morton and/or his campaign be following the restrictions placed on third party advertising by federal election finance laws? I think Facebook sponsored links may be pulling the text from the latest update posted on Morton's fan page, so how will Morton and/or his campaign be keeping track of whether money was spent on advertising for his campaign, or on advertising for Harper? If the text is simply being pulled from a recent update on Morton's fan page rather than being specifically selected for this ad by Morton or his campaign it is possible that the existence of this advertising for Harper is completely unintentional.

If Morton's campaign is paying for these advertisements are there any provincial or federal laws or regulations related to the use of provincial political contributions and leadership campaign funds being used to purchase advertising for federal political parties and/or candidates and are they being followed?

I suppose another key question is is this advertising for Harper, for Morton's campaign, or both? It seems to be endorsing Harper, but only links to Morton's fan page.

Edmonton-Sherwood Park Update

2011-03-16T00:00:00.003-06:00

With the NDP membership in Edmonton-Sherwood Park nominating Mike Scott, an active member of CUPE Local 30 as their candidate for the next federal election (which could be happening as early as next week) it appears that all candidates are in place in the riding that hosted what was the second closest race in Alberta in 2008 just behind Linda Duncan's victory over Rahim Jaffer in Edmonton-Strathcona

Scott will be facing incumbent Conservative MP Tim Uppal, returning candidates Rick Szostak (Liberal), James Ford (independent) and Green Party candidate Chris Valee. A little more than a year ago I posted a brief summary of the 2008 vote, which I'm going to quote here rather than rehashing something I've already posted:

Uppal was elected in 2008 to replace outgoing Edmonton-Sherwood Park MP Ken Epp, by a very small margin, at least by Alberta standards having won 35.84% of the vote verses Independent (conservative) candidate James Ford's 32.45% of the vote, a difference of 1 668 votes. Ford threw his hat in the ring after many members of the local Conservative Riding Association were upset by the rules surrounding the nomination process for the nomination Uppal won. Many Conservative Party member's, including former Edmonton-Sherwood Park board members ended up working on James Ford's campaign and/or openly supporting him. Even former MP Ken Epp was spotted at James Ford's election night events.

Some interesting things the election showed about the vote in Edmonton-Sherwood Park is that even with the Conservative vote almost evenly between two candidates (Ken Epp won 63% in 2006) the Conservative still won a plurality of the votes. The election also showed the influence of grassroots organizing in the riding, verses the influence of spending money. It's my understanding the Ford had a very strong grassroots organization campaigning for him during the campaign, so in spite of spending $34,907, less than half of Uppal's $85,943, Ford managed to finish extremely close to Uppal. Another interesting thing to note is that NDP candidate Brian LaBell spent $110 but finished with 12.89% of the vote, besting Liberal Rick Szostak, who spent $24,297 and Green candidate Nina Erfani who spent $3,678 and won 7.48% of the vote.

It will be interesting to see if James Ford manages to hold or build on the votes that he won in 2008. While voters in the riding may have been upset enough over the nomination process that saw Uppal selected as the Conservative candidate I'm not sure if voters are still as upset about this now as they were in 2008. While it may seem natural for voters to simply just choose another "conservative" candidate if they become disenchanted with the incumbent they may look for other alternatives when they realize the only real difference between the two candidates is in their views on the legitimacy of a past nomination process. I also think some of those who supported Ford were not committed conservative supporters, or regular conservative supporters and were voting for the candidate they felt had the best chance of defeating the conservative, and these voters might also be looking for another alternative, especially in a future election where Ford may not run. With Michael Ignatieff and the Liberal brand continuing to prove to be unpopular with Albertans voters may be looking for another alternative.

As I mentioned then 2008 NDP Candidate Brian LaBelle secured 12.89% of the vote, finishing ahead of both the Liberal and Green candidates in spite of spending a small fraction of what the Liberal candidate used. LaBelle achieved this in spite of not taking time off work to campaign as well as boycotting the Sherwood Park election forum (though he did attend other forums in the riding) and not even having campaign signs. This shows that the riding does have a core NDP vote that can be built upon. Interestingly as recently as the 2000 election nearby Edmonton-Strathcona saw only 14.78% of voters choosing the NDP candidate, but with hard work on the part of the membership and candidates this increased in the 2004, 2006 and 2008 which saw Linda Duncan win the seat. Considering parts of Edmonton-Sherwood Park have been represented provincially by the NDP in recent years as well as changing demographics in the riding it is not completely unrealistic to think that there could one day in the not too distant future be an NDP MP representing the riding if the membership and candidates work on building the riding not only during the next few elections but between the elections as well.

Random Pondering

2011-03-13T22:10:00.009-06:00

With a federal election likely happening in the next few weeks, as well as the Alberta PCs and Liberals having holding leadership contests I figured now would be an interesting time to get back into blogging.

I thought I would start with a few random thoughts and ponderings I've had lately that may at some point be expanded into larger posts as well.

Postal Strike and a Federal Election?

It is looking more and more like there will be a federal election this spring. Based on what I am hearing from postal workers I know it is also looking like the Canadian Union of Postal Workers will be going on strike at some point this spring. This means that there is a chance that there could be a postal strike during a federal election (unless there is legislation in place preventing them from doing so. I don't know of any but some provinces have legislation keeping their public sector workers on the job during election periods, so the existence of similar legislation at the federal level would not surprise me.).

If a strike does occur it will be interesting to see how the various parties react. Both in terms of their messaging related towards the strike, but perhaps even more interesting will be how the parties deal with the logistical issues a postal worker strike may pose for their campaigns. Mailings, whether it's a simple post card asking for a vote or a full platform, are a key component in many campaigns, and not having postal service would force campaigns to either focus on other ways to communicate with voters, or deliver more leaflets on their own. Elections Canada would also have to find another way to deliver voting information to the public since mail is their primary method of communication. Then there is sending documents required for campaigns as well as shipping campaign materials - which I suppose could just be shifted to courier services or electronic methods in the case of documents.

Obviously social media is playing an important role in many campaigns - though perhaps a postal strike will put an even greater emphasis on social media. The money not spent on mailings could also in this hypothetical situation also simply find itself shifted towards radio or television advertising, or hiring more phonebanks to call voters than normal.

EDIT/UPDATE

I noticed a number of people are ending up here searching for whether a strike can happen during a federal election - specifically postal strikes. This blog is actually the first result on Google when you search "can there be a strike during a federal election," among others.

I'm not actually sure, but this is what the Canada Labour Code says about the matter (which would apply to Canada Post):

Right to strike or lockout limited during period between Parliaments

90. (1) Where a strike or lockout not prohibited by this Part occurs or may occur during the time commencing on the date of a dissolution of Parliament and ending on the date fixed for the return of the writs at the next following general election and, in the opinion of the Governor in Council, adversely affects or would adversely affect the national interest, the Governor in Council may during that time make an order deferring the strike or lockout during the period commencing on the day the order is made and ending on the twenty-first day following the date fixed for the return of the writs.

Minister’s report

(2) Where the Governor in Council makes an order pursuant to subsection (1) during the time mentioned in that subsection, the Minister shall, on any of the first ten sitting days of the first session of Parliament next following that time, lay before Parliament a report stating the reasons for the making of the order.

1972, c. 18, s. 1; 1984, c. 39, s. 33.

So... the answer is maybe? I'm not a lawyer but It looks like the government can prevent a strike during an election, but they don't have to.

Candidates and Nomination Meetings

At both the provincial and federal levels the parties are lining up their candidates and nomination meetings are being held.

On the provincial level an election is possible as early as the fall, though more likely in the new year around the four year mark for the life of the current legislature. The Wildrose Alliance has been busy nominating candidates for a while now and currently have a large lead over the other parties in terms of nominated candidates. The PCs have also recently started nominating their candidates and while they still have nowhere near as many nominated candidates as the Wildrose Alliance this will likely quickly change, and they clearly have a commanding lead in terms of identified candidates given the number of incumbents they have. The Alberta NDP and Liberals also have also nominated and identified several candidates.

In Alberta on the federal level the Conservatives have all of their candidates lined up. The NDP has identified all their candidates and have a number of nomination meetings coming up in the near future to formalize candidates, including one in Edmonton-Sherwood Park tomorrow. I have no idea how many candidates the Liberals have ready to go. There will also be at least one serious independent candidate in Alberta with James Ford, who came close to capturing Edmonton-Sherwood Park in 2008 having announced his candidacy in the next federal election.

Deron Bilous nominated as the Alberta NDP Candidate for Edmonton - Beverly - Clareview

2010-05-05T22:23:00.006-06:00

Tonight Deron Bilous was acclaimed as the Alberta NDP candidate in Edmonton – Beverly – Clareview. Deron is a teacher at Edmonton’s Inner City High School, and a member of various community organizations and volunteer boards. In the 2008 Alberta Election Deron carried the NDP banner in Edmonton – Centre.

I first met Deron in January 2007, shortly after he declared his intention to contest the Alberta NDP nomination for Edmonton – Centre. Deron ultimately managed to succeed in winning the nomination, and never stopped campaigning from then until the end of the 2008 election. I was definitely impressed by Deron’s enthusiasm whenever I ran into him between his nomination and the end of the election. While I did not end up spending any time working on Deron’s campaign (I spent most of my time on Ray Martin’s campaign in Beverly Clairview) I heard a lot of great things about Deron from the people that were involved with his campaign. Even though he lost his first campaign in Edmonton - Centre, Deron made it clear that he intended to run again, and ultimately selected Beverly – Clairview as the constituency he would be running in.

Deron’s campaign already appears to be off to a good start. He has a great core of volunteers behind him, including experienced campaigners from his previous campaign, a number of experienced individuals who worked on Ray Martin’s campaigns in Beverly – Clareview and many new faces. Tonight’s nomination meeting drew approximately 85 people, which is impressive for an uncontested nomination meeting. Deron also has the opportunity to build upon an already strong NDP base in the constituency, where Ray Martin was only narrowly defeated in 2008, and an advantage in the fact that incumbent Tory MLA Tony Vandermeere is virtually unknown in the riding, having done pretty much nothing since his election.

Deron is the Alberta NDP’s first nominated candidate for the next provincial election, and as far as I know the first nominated candidate for any party in any constituency. The NDP will likely be nominating candidates in a number of other constituencies in the next few months.

Give the Gift of Life

2010-04-18T03:39:00.000-06:00

I haven't posted anything here for a long time, I may get back into writing here eventually. Today's post is going to be on a non-political topic.

A close friend of mine, Katharine Hay passed away suddenly late last month from complications related to kidney disease, she was 24. Many readers of this blog, or readers of the various blogging sites that this blog gets re-posted to will know Katharine from her time as the co-Chair of the New Democratic Youth of Alberta, or other work she did with the NDP. Others will know her from her blog Homegrown Socialist.

Katharine accomplished a lot in her life, in spite of the challenges she faced. I've already summed up my thoughts about her elsewhere, but if you'd like to read about just some of what she accomplished, you can read this tribute to her from the Edmonton Journal.

Next Sunday, April 25th at Rundle Park in Edmonton the Kidney Foundation will be holding their annual Give the Gift of Life Fun Run and Walk. Katharine had been training for the 5km run herself before she passed. Since she is not going to be able to do the run herself many of Katharine's friends and her family are going to be doing the run (or walk) in her place. Donations to Katharine's personal page currently exceed $3,000 and donations to her team, "Team Kat" are currently over $4,000, but I know that we can raise much more in the next week.

The Kidney Foundation meant a lot to Katharine. They provided her with a lot of support while she was growing up, and she did her best to give back to them, whether it was working as a counsellor at their summer camp for kid's with kidney disease while she was a teen, or more recently mentoring children with kidney disease or participating in fundraisers like this one.

It would mean a lot to me, and to everyone else who was part of Katharine's life if you could contribute even just a small amount to her fundraising page for this run.

I'm going to end this post with the text of the tribute Alberta NDP leader Brian Mason made to Katharine in the Alberta Legislature this past Thursday.

From the Hansard of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta for April 15th 2010:

Mr. Mason: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today I’d like to pay tribute to a young Albertan who passed away too soon but in her short time with us made a real impact on me and on the province. Katharine Hay passed away last month in Edmonton from complications of kidney disease at the age of 24. Katharine served as a chair of the New Democratic Youth of Alberta, was the NDP candidate in Sherwood Park in the last election, and was an excellent event organizer and fundraiser. She travelled to British Columbia during their last provincial election, working to re-elect Cariboo North MLA Bob Simpson.

In addition, Katharine was a talented biathlete, excellent cross- country skier, and participated in cutting-horse shows as a turnback rider. During the past year Katharine was enrolled in NAIT’s radio and television arts program, pursuing a career in radio news. Katharine did all this and more in spite of having to battle kidney disease her entire life. She showed how courage and determination can change lives and, hopefully, can contribute to changing a province.

At a time when young people are often discouraged from getting involved in public affairs and frustrated by a political system that does not speak to their concerns, Katharine showed that politically engaged youth could make a difference. I know her example inspired others to become involved as well.

Before her passing Katharine was preparing to run in the Kidney Foundation of Alberta’s annual give the gift of life fun run and walk. Many of her friends will now be running and walking in her memory at Rundle park on April 25. Donations for Team Kat now exceed $3,700 and can be made online at www.kidney.ca.

Katharine has left an indelible mark on me, on our party, and on our province. I am very proud to have had her on my team.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Letter to My MP - Re: Home Renovation Tax Credit and Proroguing Parliament

2009-12-30T18:36:00.004-07:00

I wrote a letter to my MP (Conservative Tim Uppal) today after receiving a ten-percenter reminding me to take advantage of the home renovation tax credit.

Here it is:

Dear Mr. Uppal,

I received a notice from your office today reminding me to take advantage of the Home Renovation Tax Credit. I also learned today that Mr. Harper is seeking to prorogue parliament until March.

Since it appears that you will not be working until March I am hoping that you will be able to find the time to assist some of your constituents with renovations to their homes. Feel free to contact me and let me know when you will be available to assist me.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Apparently the Secret Committees Are So Secret Tory MLAs Don't Even Know When Their Pay For Serving On Them Increases

2009-12-04T09:27:00.009-07:00

I was just reading this article here on the Edmonton Journal website about Tory MLAs being paid to sit on Tory-only committees.

Now, the existence of these committees didn't surprise me, I knew they existed. What did surprise me was a quote from Scott Hennig, the Alberta Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. In his quote, Hennig mentioned that these changes were implemented in May 2008:

"The way we pay our MLAs has long been ridiculous, but it got a lot more ridiculous in May 2008 when they made these changes," he said." - Scott Hennig as quoted by the Edmonton Journal

Now, this quote caught my attention, because back in August, Tory MLA Johnathan Denis had boasted about how MLAs had put a salary freeze in place for 2009. When I pointed out that I didn't find a salary freeze that impressive in light to the massive increases that had been implemented in 2008 to what MLAs were paid to serve on committees, Johnathan Denis denied that these increases had occurred.

So, what was printed in today's Journal seems to contradict what Johnathan Denis said on Twitter back in August.

Good News: Calgary Aryan Guard Group No More

2009-11-25T17:26:00.004-07:00

Anti-Racist Action Calgary is reporting that Calgary's Aryan Guard group has disbanded.

This comes following news that prominent Calgary Aryan Guard member Kyle McKee is being sought by Calgary Police in relation to his alleged involvement with the attempted member of other member's of the Aryan Guard. It's not surprising that a group made up of people filled with so much hate ultimately succumbed to their own infighting.

While it's great news that the group has disbanded, will this mean that the people that were involved with the group will drift away? Or will they simply re-group, and carry on with the activities that they were involved in?

A related post on previous anti-racist actions in Calgary can be found here

What Happens to the Turkey?

2009-11-22T01:24:00.001-07:00

This Wednesday, Obama will pardon a turkey. This is something that is done annually by the US President.

My question is: What happens to the turkey after it's been pardoned?

Photo Post: Stop The Cuts! Rally - Red Deer

2009-11-07T17:32:00.004-07:00

On 7 November 2009, over 1,000 people gathered in Red Deer at a rally organized by Friends of Medicare to protest cuts being made by Alberta's 'Progressive' Conservative Government to healthcare, education and public services. The group marched from a community centre, to the Capri Hotel where the PC AGM was being held.

UPDATE: The media was reporting 700, and at the beginning the organizers were saying there were over 700 people there. By the end rally organizers and the RCMP placed the number at over 1,000.

Here are a few select pictures I took at the rally:

You can view all the pictures I took by checking out my Flickr Photostream

Separatists Want to Legalize Euthanasia Says Edmonton-Sherwood Park MP

2009-09-18T13:03:00.001-06:00

I recently moved back to Fort Saskatchewan, which means I am now represented by a new Member of Parliament, Edmonton-Sherwood Park's Tim Uppal. When I lived in Edmonton-Centre I regularly received so called "ten-percenters" from Edmonton-Centre MP Laurie Hawn, as well as some from various Liberals (I can remember Iggy, Hedy Fry and Scott Brison of the top of my head) but the amount of ten-percenters I received while living there can not even being to compare with the sheer volume I have been receiving from Uppal since I moved to Fort Saskatchewan. This is likely because Uppal probably had the smallest margin of victory for any of the Conservative MPs in Alberta in the 2008 election, so he's feeling rather insecure.

Uppal was elected in 2008 to replace outgoing Edmonton-Sherwood Park MP Ken Epp, by a very small margin, at least by Alberta standards having won 35.84% of the vote verses Independent (conservative) candidate James Ford's 32.45% of the vote, a difference of 1 668 votes. Ford threw his hat in the ring after many members of the local Conservative Riding Association were upset by the rules surrounding the nomination process for the nomination Uppal won. Many Conservative Party member's, including former Edmonton-Sherwood Park board members ended up working on James Ford's campaign and/or openly supporting him. Even former MP Ken Epp was spotted at James Ford's election night events.

Some interesting things the election showed about the vote in Edmonton-Sherwood Park is that even with the Conservative vote almost evenly between two candidates (Ken Epp won 63% in 2006) the Conservative still won a plurality of the votes. The election also showed the influence of grassroots organizing in the riding, verses the influence of spending money. It's my understanding the Ford had a very strong grassroots organization campaigning for him during the campaign, so in spite of spending $34,907, less than half of Uppal's $85,943, Ford managed to finish extremely close to Uppal. Another interesting thing to note is that NDP candidate Brian LaBell spent $110 but finished with 12.89% of the vote, besting Liberal Rick Szostak, who spent $24,297 and Green candidate Nina Erfani who spent $3,678 and won 7.48% of the vote.

When an election is called again, Uppal will once again be facing Szostak, who has been nominated to represent the Liberal's once again. I have also heard that Ford will likely be running again. If Ford does not run again it will be interesting to see what happens to the 32% of voters who supported him in the last election. Will they return to the Conservative fold and vote for Uppal? Or will they decide to vote Liberal or NDP (I'm betting on a mix of all three).

Now, to the reason I started to write the post. I've been receiving ten-percenters from Uppal on probably about a weekly basis since moving here. The majority of them have seemed completely ridiculous and trumpeted the Conservative party's line, but the one I received in the mail this morning is the most ridiculous one yet.

It bears the headline in large font of "Separatists Want to Legalize Euthanasia" and goes on to describe how a Bloc MP is introducing a bill to allow for euthanasia.

Uppal is quoted as saying "There is no situation in which it is the government's role to legalize taking life."

The flyer goes on to say "The bill would introduce a permanent loophole in the Criminal Code of Canada, effectively making euthanasia legal for those doctors who perform it on terminal patients or those who find themselves in sever pain. The patients would have to be 18 years of age."

Then there's the questionnaire part of the flyer that you're encouraged to return to him. on the front page is the leading question:

"What Do You think?

-No! Tim should not support the Bloc's bill.

-Yes! Tim should allow the government to support helping people die!"

The back of the ten-percenter also has several leading questions.

Now if I was someone who did not support euthanasia this, I think I would be very concerned that the Conservatives have now working with the "Separatists" in order to get legislation through the House of Commons.

Personally, I think euthanasia should be legalized. I don't see why a terminally ill adult, who is still capable of making their own decisions should not be able to decide to allow their doctor to euthanize them, rather than continue to suffer sever pain. Another thing that causes me concern on this ten-percenter is the last question on the backside "Is the government within its rights to stop someone from committing suicide."He's implying that suicide and euthanasia are the same thing, which I, and I'm sure many others do not. There is a difference between a terminally ill person suffering severe pain choosing to end their life, and someone who could probably cope if they were provided with adequate mental and medical support.

I think this is probably going to be the first post in a series I'll dub "Ridiculous Ten-percenters Tim Uppal Sends Out." Assuming there isn't an election soon, and that if there is Uppal holds his seat.

Alberta NDP Convention - Conclusion

2009-09-14T22:00:00.003-06:00

I initially meant to blog about the second and third days of convention separately, and to do them immediately afterwords, but I didn't, oh well. Here they are together.

Saturday was fairly calm for the most part. The proposed "plain language" constitution was referred to a new constitutional committee. In general delegates were both confused about changes that were made, not willing to adopt the entire thing as a whole, or spend time going through it section by section. I personally appreciate the amount of time and effort the committee put into the document, but I was not comfortable with the document as a whole, as there were some major changes in it.

There were a few policy resolutions introduced and passed, most were fairly typical NDP style resolutions. A speech was also given by CUPE President Paul Moist encouraging cooperation between the NDP and the labour movement.

Elections for table officer's and regional Vice-Presidents were also held in the afternoon. All of the candidates for table officers were acclaimed.

This year's table officer's will be:
Leader - Brian Mason
President - Nancy Furlong.
Treasurer - Erica Bullwinkle.
1st Vice-President - Al Brown
2nd Vice-President - Steve Bradshaw.

Most of the regional Vice-Presidental candidates were acclaimed, with the exception of the male Edmonton representative and the male Northern representative. Before anyone asks I'm not going to be commenting on how close these races may or may not have been, as I was on the balloting committee and helped count the votes, and agreed to not reveal the actual numbers.

The Regional Vice-Presidents are:
Edmonton: Gil McGowan and Peggy Wright.

Calgary: Eric Carpendale and Rh'ena Oake.

Central: Carol Wodak and Len Legault

North: Mandy Melnyk Elroy Diemert (defeated carpenter Ken Kuzminski of Jasper).

South: Mark Sandilands and Anne Wilson

The executive will be rounded out by the co-chairs of the caucuses (NDYA, LGBTQ etc), Past President Anand Sharma (yes that's the name of the position) and Federal Council representative.

There was also a slightly controversial fund raising pitch deemed by some to be sexist. While I personally wasn't offended, I can see why some people were, and the staffer who organized it should have known better. I heard from a few people that the pitch managed to convince them not to donate to the party as a result.

Saturday was rounded out with a tribute dinner honouring Brian Mason's 20 years of public service. Speakers included Jack Layton, and Brian's good friend, and the last good MLA from Vegreville Derek Fox.

Sunday was more interesting. First there were caucus reports, and Jack Layton speaking (he did end up coming, after canceling earlier on). Sadly there was apparently some confusion about the timing of Jack speaking so some of the media missed it.

The contentious proposal from the Democratic Renewal Project promoting an electoral alliance with the Liberals was debated to a great extent. After more than an hour of debate, with DRP members repeatedly trumpeting the same flawed arguments (the Liberals are very similar to the NDP, or even to the left of the NDP... that vote splitting greatly decreases the number of seats we hold etc), the motion was soundly defeated. I'm hoping that the DRP will accept that the vast majority of NDP members are against the idea. While I'd be fine with them bringing this forward again, I hope they do not waste so much of our time debating it, as many policy resolutions were not dealt with because we wasted so much time on a a motion that clearly would not have passed.

Rebbecca Blaikie, the Federal NDP's treasurer gave an excellent presentation on engaging more people, especially youth in the party.

Finally, the IBEW was notably absent from convention. The rumors I've heard about their boycott of convention revolve around the IBEW not being happy with who was running for various positions on the executive. There were also mentions of their feelings of entitlement to a number of positions, due to the amount of funds they donate to the party (isn't pandering to donors something we criticize the Liberals and PCs for). Seeing as the IBEW still managed to get two of their members onto the executive, in-spite of none of their members showing up (aside from one of the individuals running for a position), throwing a tantrum and refusing to show up for convention for the reasons that I've heard seem rather childish. Even the IBEW members I've asked about the boycott seemed to not really understand the details, or do not know exactly why they were boycotting, but just didn't go anyways. I'm disappointed that none of their members decided to show up anyways and simply did as they were told. On the same note, I'm slightly glad that such a large group of people, who are evidently unable to think for themselves didn't bother to show up.
If an IBEW member wants to correct me on reasons for their boycott, I would invite them to, but what I've posted is my understanding of the issue based on what I've been told.

On another note, the Calgary-Glenmore by-election results are in, and it appears that the NDP and Liberal vote combined could still not have won the election. Take that DRP!

Alberta NDP Convention 2009 Day 1 Summary, and Looking Forward

2009-09-12T01:08:00.001-06:00

Well day one of the 2009 Alberta NDP Convention has concluded.

The Friday evening of ANDP Conventions are typically fairly slow paced. Like other years it started off with some routine housekeeping, and was followed by a speaker to kick things off. This year the party brought in Matt Hebb, who directed the 2003, 2006 and 2009 Nova Scotia NDP campaigns. I missed Matt’s speech because I was working the registration table, but I heard him speak at this year’s Federal NDP Convention in Halifax, and I found him to be an engaging speaker with a lot of knowledge to share.

A large portion of the evening was devoted to a presentation by the Constitutional Review Committee which was struck after last year’s convention. The committee brought forward a proposed new constitution for the party, which is written in “plain language. The committee attempted to explain what was meant by plain language, and some of the other changes they had made, but it was clear that many delegates seemed confused about exactly what was going on, and exactly what the process would be for voting on the new constitution tomorrow. The proposal will be brought forward as one motion, but I forsee it being split into multiple motions on the floor, because there seem to be a number of changes made to the constitution itself beyond language, that from what I could tell, seemed to make many delegates uncomfortable, and I cannot see the proposal garnering the required two-thirds of the vote that it would require to pass as is. Some notable changes that are likely to cause contention (and a number already did at the panel) include:
-the removal of any references to Democratic Socialism
-Changing the name of the party in the constitution from “The Alberta New Democratic Party” to “The Alberta New Democrats”
-renaming the “Provincial Secretary” to the much more corporate sounding “Executive Director”
-removing the rights of Federal Riding Associations in Alberta to send delegates to convention
- reducing the number of delegates allotted to the party caucuses (including equity seeking groups) at convention
As I said, I cannot see the proposal passing as is, but I think large portions of it could be passed if each section is dealt with individually.

Most of the other policy resolutions are going to be less contentious. A few that stand out as having the potential for contention include a motion put forward by members of the Democratic Reform Project, a motion to change the way fundraising revenue is shared between the central party, and constituency association and a constitutional amendment being brought forward by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers to hold Convention every second year instead of every year.

Things I’m looking forward to over the next couple days include a presentation by Rebecca Blaikie on engaging youth in the party, the New Democratic Youth of Alberta’s AGM and Jack Layton speaking.

Notley Running for Alberta NDP Leader This Weekend? - I Doubt It

2009-09-10T18:17:00.002-06:00

In the last few hours someone has started a "Notley for Alberta" account on both Twitter and Blogspot promoting Rachel Notley for Leader of the Alberta NDP. This has garnered some reaction already on Twitter, and has probably already recived more attention than it really should have.

The group describes itself as "We are grassroots who support Rachel Notley becoming leader of the Alberta's NDP." The first (and so far only) Twitter post they have made is "Hello Twitter! Are you ready for #ANDP09? We are! #AbLeg"
Now the group does not really make their goal clear. Are they attempting to recruit Notely to run for leadership? Or is she already planning on doing so and they are simply supporting her?
Is the group aiming to see Notley elected at the Alberta NDP Convention this weekend? Or just simply have the goal of eventually seeing her elected.

My bet is that the group is simply trying to recruit Notley and that she has no involvement in it whatsoever. It's common knowledge within the party that Notley has no intention of running for leadership while her children are still young (if ever). She also seems to have a good relationship with Brian Mason, who has not announced he is planning on stepping down, on the contrary, he has made it clear in the past that he plans on leading the party into the next election.

Halifax Events Update

2009-08-12T01:04:00.003-06:00

I figured I would post a list of the events (besides main convention) that I know of happening during convention in Halifax:

Wednesday 12 August
Unofficial NSYND get-together - at Lower Deck located at 1869 Upper Water Street, Halifax. Sorry I don't know a time.

Thursday 13 August
NDYC Convention - for those of us under 25 will happen at the Convention Centre, starts with a breakfast with Jack Layton at 8:00 AM (registration opens at 7:30). NDYC Convention goes all day and into the evening

Pubs, Pulpits and Prarie Fires Book Launch - at Delta Barrington (1875 Barrington Street)
Elroy Deimert reads from his new book, Pubs, Pulpits, and Prairie Fires:

20 minutes of popular history about The On To Ottawa Trek, the Regina Riot, Tommy Douglas, the rise of the CCF, the Wobblies, Slim Evans, Quebec City Summit of the Americas, and other intriguing subjects. Meet the author and browse some of the other books from Fernwood, a progressive leftist press.

Halifax Harbour Cruise - organized by the NSYND, a cruise and party around the harbour on a boat. Tickets are $10. There is a bar. Starts at 8:30 at Murphy's On the Water, Halifax Boardwalk (1751 Lower Water Street)

Friday 14 August
There's an overpriced dinner that you can look up on the convention website if you really care about it

There is also a cool sounding event starting at about 9PM at the Maritime Museum of the Atlantic that is only $10. I'll be heading there.

Saturday 15 August
Again, an overpriced official event being put on by the party. This one costs $300. If you want to spend this much you can look it up.

The New Democratic Party to End All Parties - A cool sounding event at Tom's Little Havana (5428 Doyle Street) starting at 9:00PM. Check out proletarian.ca for more info

Another group is organizing a Tweet up Saturday night at 9PM at the Carleton (1685 Argyl Street, Halifax).

If you want to be super creepy and stalk me you can just check out my Twitter, where I'll probably be posting about where I am etc

Don't Want to Spend $300 on the Fancy Official Convention Event? There Are Other Options!

2009-08-06T20:49:00.005-06:00

For those of us heading to Halifax for the Federal NDP Convention that do not have, or do not want to spend $300 on Saturday night (15 August) to go to a reception with Jack Layton and one of Obama's staffers, there are a couple other affordable unofficial options being planned:

A friend of mine, Matei Savulesu, and others are organizing a party at Tom's Little Havana (5428 Doyle Street, Halifax). The event will start at 9PM on Saturday the 15th. They have a website for the event up at http://www.proletarian.ca

Another group is organizing a Tweet up Saturday night at 9PM at the Carleton (1685 Argyl Street, Halifax).

I'm personally leaning towards heading to the event at Tom's, if I don't end up at both at some point.

NDP Federal Convention 2009

2009-08-05T00:01:00.002-06:00

The 2009 NDP Federal Convention (HFX09) is only a little more than a week away. This time the convention will be taking place from the 14th-16th of August at the World Trade and Convention Centre in Halifax, Nova Scotia, where the Nova Scotia New Democrats won a majority of the seats in this past June's provincial election becoming the first NDP government elected east of Ontario. On 13 August the New Democratic Youth of Canada will be holding their own convention.

I will be there as a delegate for Edmonton-Centre and am looking forward to it as this will be both my first Federal Convention, and my first time in Nova Scotia. I will definitely be tweeting from the convention and will try to do some blogging, though I'm not sure how practical live blogging will be, or if I will really manage to fit any time in for it during the convention. I'll also make sure I post photos.

Unfortunately I haven't been able to locate anywhere where proposed policy resolutions have been posted, but I have heard of a few of them, and a couple have received some media attention. Later on this week I plan on making a post about why I am against dropping the "New" from the "New Democratic Party" name, and another on why I am in favour of separating federal and provincial memberships.

As for resolutions for the NDYC Convention, I had the opportunity to see them as a member of the NDYC Policy Review Committee. There are a number of excellent resolutions that I hope to see passed at convention.

Me and the Alberta NDP

2009-04-06T03:45:00.009-06:00

My experience with the Alberta NDP lately has been turbulent to say the least. Why? Because I’ve dared to express an opinion publicly that the party isn’t one big happy family and have expressed that the party was anything less than perfect.

If you want to see what I wrote, you can read them in that comments section of, what I think was an excellent post about the Alberta NDP.

I expressed a number of frustrations with the party. Among them, that there is a tendency to ignore the grassroots and that while the ongoing revitalization conferences are a great idea and have been producing a number of interesting suggestions on the direction the party should take in the future, I remain skeptical about whether these suggestions will be transformed into something concrete, or if they will just be ignored. Another thing I complained about was how power within the party was concentrated in the hands of a limited number of individuals, and that there is an ongoing effort to shut down any sort of dissent that may be expressed.

Now my comments resulted in exactly that, an attempt to shut me down. Several hours after I posted them, a Facebook message was sent to myself, Brian Mason, Sandra Houston(the Provincial Secretary) and other members of the Alberta NDP Executive’s table officers by Lou Arab, a former Chief of Staff , and partner of MLA Rachel Notley. In the message Lou demanded that the party’s President ask me to remove my comments. I told them I will do no such thing.

I shared the fact that I had been asked to remove my postings by adding the fact that I had been asked to remove them to the comments section of the aforementioned blog.

Now, because I chose to speak out publicly I’ve faced a number of attacks from various individuals, who feel I should not have. Sadly, a number of these people were those that I had previously considered to be friends. Now I can see that they were not actually my friends. It’s interesting that these people were willing to accept countless hours of my time volunteering for the party, and helping them out on numerous projects, but as soon as I expressed any sort of opinion that was contrary to the party line I became, in their opinion, a backstabber. Personally I feel that criticism is completely different from disloyalty. In fact I think those that blindly toe the party line, and believe that anyone who expresses a different opinion are disloyal are themselves committing a great disservice to the party.

I will note, that everything I said, was my personal opinion, and I was not speaking in my capacity as a member of the NDYA’s executive. Making these comments and having them misinterpreted as the opinion of the NDYA or it’s executive is something that was raised as a concern. The NDYA Executive will be meeting later this week to discuss this.

I will also note that the fact that I am not attending the party’s executive meeting Monday has nothing to do with this, I sent my regrets in several weeks ago as I have previous commitments.
I have every intention of continuing to participate within the NDP for the time being. I still believe that the Alberta NDP is the political party which best represents my beliefs, and that in spite of it's problems, it is still the best party for Albertans.. However, we’ll see if others make my continuing participation in the party impossible. Personally I think that the attempts that have been made by a few individuals to instill solidarity through intimidation are wrong.

I do not regret expressing my opinion in the least. While I have faced a number of personal attacks, the last few days has also shown me who my friends really are, and who was just using me. I would like to thank everyone who have supported me over the last few days, whether they did so publicly, or just sent me messages of support.
I stand by what I said.

Letter to the Editor Time!

2009-03-22T11:39:00.002-06:00

I'm still having fun seeing how letters I submit to the Journal are edited. So Here it goes again.

This letter was in the Journal last week:
"God Bless The Athiests" March 17,2009

They say a picture is worth a thousand words and, in this case, so is the atheistic slogan "There's probably no God ...." If you're going to say something, at least commit to it and say "there is no God." The word "probably" leaves you guessing, doesn't it? Why don't the atheists spend more time being constructive and form a few groups? They could set up a soup kitchen to feed the poor; a women's group to deal with teen pregnancy; a counseling group to deal with addictions, family violence, sexual abuse and any other number of ills that afflict our society.

Rather than getting bent out shape because of Edmonton Transit's advertising policies, they should put their energy into something that will make a difference. We believers could use some help.

Jerry de Groot, Edmonton

© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

Here is the letter I submitted to the Journal in reply:
Jerry de Groot Groot wonders why the bus ads that Atheists wish to take out state “There’s probably no God…” rather than simply stating “There is no God.” The reason is that it makes the statement more accurate, as even though there's no scientific evidence at all for God's existence, it's also impossible to prove that God doesn't exist. It’s unfortunate that other advertisers, such as Edmonton Pro-Life are not concerned with the accuracy of the ads that they take out on transit, and instead make statements that they present as being fact, when there is no real evidence to back up their positions.
As for Mr. de Groot’s other statements, I personally know many atheists who are involved with soup kitchens that feed the poor as well as counseling for addictions, family violence and all the other horrors that Mr. de Groot implies only “believers” concern themselves with. It is rather ironic that Mr. de Groot frets about Atheists getting bent out of shape over issues he finds trivial rather than making a difference, but seems to find the time to get himself bent out of shape over the positions taken by Atheists, rather than dedicating his own time to “make a difference.”
It is sad that many “believers” have narrow views similar to those held by de Groot, and cannot see that those who do not believe are not making as much, or more of a difference in the world as though who do believe.

Here is the letter the Journal published:
"Atheists Reluctant to Declare God doesn't exist"
March 22, 2009, The Edmonton Journal

In his March 17 letter, Jerry de Groot wonders why the atheists' bus ads state, "There's probably no God," rather than simply stating "There is no God." The latter is more accurate -- while there's no scientific evidence that God exists, it's impossible to prove that God doesn't exist.

As for de Groot's other statements, I know many atheists who are involved with organizations that feed the poor, offer counseling and do all the other things that de Groot implies only "believers" are concerned with. It's ironic that de Groot frets about atheists getting bent out of shape over issues he finds trivial, rather than making a difference; but he himself gets bent out of shape over the positions taken by atheists, rather than dedicating his own time to "making a difference."

It is sad that many "believers" have such narrow views and cannot see that those who do not believe are making as much, or more of a difference in the world.

D.A. Holmwood, Edmonton

Sadly, the Journal removed the part of the letter where I point out that sadly, other advertisers do not hold themselves to the same standard as the Atheist advertisers.

Alberta's Bill 18 - The Film and Video Classification Act, Goes Too Far

2009-03-12T12:25:00.004-06:00

Alberta’s Bill 18, The Film and Video Classification Act, which is set to be proclaimed into law in the fall, is going to introduce a whole new set of regulations that have to be followed by cinema owners and movie distributors, along with creating new theater inspector positions, along with a movie czar for the province.

There are a number of serious issues with this legislation.

While I do not have a problem with a system being put in place to rate films, along with some standards being set out for who can see a film, this legislation goes too far.

One of the provisions of this bill removes the rights of parents to decide which movies their children can see. As it stands now, children may attend movies that are rated 18A as long as an adult accompanies them. This new legislation would not allow children under the age of 14 to attend these films, even if their parents accompany them.
The age restriction also creates a whole new set of problems when it comes to enforcement. Seeing as most 14 year olds do not carry identification, how is someone staffing the box office at a movie theater supposed to know how old a child is? Even worse, individual box office staff can face a fine of up to $10,000 or up to two-year less a day in prison for admitting someone under 14 to one of these films, and the legislation provides no mechanism for appealing these fines, and provides no scale for them. This means that a 16 year old working for minimum wage at a box office could face a fine of up to $10,000, or probably more than they make in a year, for a simple mistake, and prison time is simply unforgivable.

So, this bill will take away a parents ability to decide whether a film is appropriate for their children, and simply tell them that it is not, while simultaneously over-penalizing box office staff for errors they may make.

Another problematic area is the idea of the film inspectors. The bill allows these inspectors to enter theaters and video stores and compel owners to turn over films, and any documents associated with these films, but does not lay out exactly what these inspectors would be looking for.

Bill 18 goes way too far.

If you want to learn more

Edit: oops my origional post missed that it could be a up to a $10 000 fine, or up to two-year less a day in prison

International Women's Day

2009-03-08T13:18:00.006-06:00

...is today
If you want to know more.

Updates

2009-02-13T09:25:00.002-07:00

It's been a couple weeks since I actually posted something here. The truth is I got a little too busy to actually write any of my thoughts down (though there were plenty of ideas for posts)

Reading Week is next week, so I should actually have some time to make some posts seeing as I have no classes.

Hurrah!

More Journal Letters - Democracy 101

2009-02-02T10:20:00.005-07:00

I've started to enjoy comparing what I send in to the Edmonton Journal as a letter to the editor, and what the Journal Published.

Anyways this letter was in the Journal last week:

Spinning the numbers

The Edmonton JournalJanuary 28, 2009

In recent interviews, Jack Layton tried to justify his attempted power grab by pointing out that 62 per cent of voters did not vote for Stephen Harper. Surely he must understand that this is how our democracy works. It is not uncommon for the ruling party to have fewer votes than the opposition parties combined.

Layton must also realize the he, personally, got far fewer votes than Harper, and the proposed coalition got none at all.

Robert Behm, Edmonton

This is what I sent to the Journal:
In his letter Robert Behm criticizes Jack Layton for not understanding how our democracy works. Sadly, it is Mr. Behm who either does not understand how our democracy works, or worse chooses to deliberately spread misinformation about our democracy.
Canadians did not vote for Stephen Harper to be Prime Minister; Canadians do not vote directly for their Prime Minister, we vote for our Members of Parliament. The party that can command the support of the most MPs in the House of Commons becomes the government. If a coalition between the Liberals and NDP can garner more support in the House of Commons than the Conservative Party, then the Liberal-NDP Coalition could legitimately form a government, conversely if the Conservatives can gain the support of the most Members of Parliament then they could legitimately form a government.
There would be nothing undemocratic about the opposition forming a government, those who do the most disservice to democracy are people like Stephen Harper, and Mr. Behm who attempt to mislead Canadians by spreading misinformation about how our democracy actually works.

This is what the Journal Published:

Democracy 101

The Edmonton Journal

Published: Saturday, January 31

Re: "Spinning the numbers," by Robert Behm, Letters, Jan. 28.

Robert Behm criticizes Jack Layton for not understanding how our democracy works. Sadly, it is Behm who seems not to understand.

Canadians did not vote for Stephen Harper to be prime minister; they voted for members of Parliament. The party that commands the support of the most MPs in the Commons forms the government.

If a Liberal-NDP coalition could garner more support in the House than the Conservatives, then the coalition could legitimately form a government. There would be nothing undemocratic about the opposition forming a government.

D.A. Holmwood, Edmonton

So once again my letter was edited. Hurray! Not as bad as last time when words were changed to fit the Journal's own political stance, and where the Journal proved my point about the right wing media controlling what is seen by Western Canadians by removing my statement accusing them of doing so.

This time the main point of my letter was changed though. What I really meant to do was criticize the tactic employed by the Conservative Party, and by their supporters whereby they deliberately mislead the Canadian public, by either lying directly to them about the legitimacy or legality of a potential coalition, or mislead them by omission. The Journal changed my letter so it was a simple "no this is actually how the system works" style letter.

UofA Spending $25 000 on LRT Signs?

2009-01-28T23:05:00.000-07:00

The Executive Committee of Edmonton City Council has, at the behest of the University of Alberta, decided to rename the Bay LRT station Bay/Enterprise Square Station.
Apparently the University feels that people may have a hard time finding their new Enterprise Square campus, which is located in the old Hudson's Bay Company building. I guess people who are capable of getting into programs offered by the University are easily confused.
The station was originally named to reflect the proximity of the Bay building, but mostly to reflect the role the Hudson's Bay Company had had in the development of the city. I see no real reason to rename it Enterprise Square. While we're at it should we had some other descriptions so that people can more easily locate other things in the area? Maybe it should be the Bay/Enterprise Square/City TV/Sobeys' Urban Market Station. Those are all things with a relative proximity to the station.

It is also going to cost $25 000 to put up new signs to reflect the change to the station's name, and to record a new station announcement for use on the train. At first I was upset that the city would be spending this much money to accomadate the University's request, then I found out it's not the City that will be paying but the University. The same University that just last week raised tuition and rent for students. So, the University is cash strapped and needs to raise tuition and rent, but they have enough money to pay to re-sign LRT stations? I think there's something wrong there.

Another thing this makes me think of. Does this mean the city is willing to change the name of LRT stations as long as a nearby business or entity is willing to pay for the cost of putting up new signs. Are we going to have a Stadium/McDonalds/Save on Foods Station in the near future? Or a Clairview/Superstore/Club Fit Station? Or a Central/Starbucks station?

Changing LRT station names for things like this seems silly to me. The apparently cash-strapped University paying to re-brand stations is even more rediculous.

The Budget and Iggy

2009-01-28T22:02:00.002-07:00

I am not going to waste much time going over what I think of the budget. I think the budget itself has been analyzed by people who understand it much better than I. I will say that I do not agree with many of the things in the budget and feel it sells Canadians short. The budget clearly demonstrates that Harper is putting the needs of corporations ahead of the needs of Canadians by providing $60 billion in corporate tax cuts. The budget will not make it easier for most Canadians. The budget is freezing EI payments and will not make any more Canadians eligible for EI, and it is continuing the Harper government's attacks on equality for women by curbing the ability of women to pursue pay equity complaints.

I expected as much from Harper, he has proven time and time again that he does not have the interests of Canada at heart, however I am extremly dissapointed in Michael Ignatieff's contradictory response to the budget.
After repeatedly mentioning that the Conservatives have failed Canadians for the last two years, mismanaged the country's finances, talking about how the Prime Minister should not have shut down Parliament, and saying the Conservatives could not be trusted, Ignatieff, instead of taking a real stand, or doing anything at all really, said he would be supporting the budget, subject to Liberal amendments.
However, his amendments do nothing to fix the problems that Ignatieff said the budget had. Instead he will simply be adding a requirement for the governmen to report to parliament on the budget's implementation (isn't that what fiscal updates already do?).

Ignatieff would rather avoid an election than take a stand to ensure that the budget best reflects the needs of Canadians. Instead of doing what was best for Canadians Ignatieff chose to do what was best for himself and for the Liberal party. Instead of taking a principled stand as Leader of the Opposition, Ignatieff decided to prop up the Conservatives.

At least now that they've formed thier own defacto coalition Canadians will be able to see that there really is no difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals.

Obama Boom and Poodles

2009-01-21T21:34:00.003-07:00

A couple things caught my attention today.

Britain's Daily Mail, apparently desperately seeking a new unique angle on Obama's inauguration, wrote this article about the probability of an Obama induced baby-boom due to all the "celebrating" going on as a result of Obama's ascension to the presidency and the new feelings of "hope" American's are having.

While the rest of the world was busy celebrating Obama's inaguration, former French President Jacques Chirac's "clinically depressed" poodle was busy mauling the former French leader, sending him to the hospital. Perhaps Sumo (the name of the dog) was a supporter of John McCain (Chirac was a conservative leader), or perhaps he was upset that he did not get to witness the inaguration for himself.

One thing is for certain, for the sake of his children, this is one dog that Obama should deffinitly rule out as a possible Presidential Dog. Well two things actually, it's also certain that Daily Mail writers have too much time on their hands.

No Anti-Idling Bylaw in Edmonton for Now

2009-01-21T21:30:00.000-07:00

Well, it looks like City Council decided to delay voting on a possible anti-idling bylaw for Edmonton, opting instead for a year-long educational campaign.

RCMP and Encana Treat Local Residents As If They Are Criminals

2009-01-14T16:23:00.005-07:00

In various articles I have been reading lately about the attacks on Encana sites in Northern Alberta and BC, the RCMP have been complaining about a lack of cooperation from residents living around Encana sites that have been bombed.

Now, the initial reaction I had, and that most people likely have is "why would they not be ccooperating? Aren't they concerned for their own safety?" afterall, sour gas leaking from one of these wells or pipelines could kill people living nearby. However after reading this article I can't say I blame them for not cooperating.

Here are two exerpts from the Journal describing the behaviour of Encana Security Staff:

"Jake Hebert was driving home one night after a long stretch away for work. He was just about there when the security staff pulled him over. When asked what he was doing, he explained he was returning to the house he has lived in for 20 years.

"One was shining a light in my face and the other one was crawling under my truck," Hebert recalled. "It was unbelievable"."

and

""Now security will drive by and stop and look in the windows and it's like, 'What do you think we're doing, building bombs at the kitchen table?' ""

If a private company's security started acting towards my friends, my neighbours and I in the way Encana's security has been acting towards people who live near these sites, I would likely not feel like cooperating either.

A private security company has absolutely no business trespassing on private property, or stopping vehicles on public roadways.

My advice to the RCMP: If you want cooperation, tell Encana security to back off, or start prosecuting them for tresspassing and stop treating people living near these sites in a way that makes them feel as if you have already decided that they are terrorists.
A little respect goes a long way in these situations. Harrasment is completly detremental.

Letters to the Editor - Yay for Editing!

2009-01-13T13:15:00.006-07:00

This letter was in the Edmonton Journal the other day:
"What Do Torontonians Know About Alberta's Oilsands
Re: "Distrust of oilsands rampant, poll finds; Companies not green enough, 46 per cent say," The Journal, Jan. 9.

What do uppity Torontonians know about the oilsands other than what the frenetic environmental lobby and the liberal press feeds them? They've never been east of Oshawa.

After all, they don't mind sucking up the better part of the taxes Alberta raises from our "dirty" oilsands to bail out Ontario's obsolete and failed auto industry that produces the gas-guzzlers that consume the oilsands products.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking but nothing new -- typical of self-righteous, self-satisfied urban folks who don't like to get their hands dirty before they turn up the heat and leave their porch lights on.

Sharon Maclise, Edmonton"

This letter seemed fairly ignorant to me, and a Google search revealed that Sharon Maclise has been a Wildrose Alliance candidate for the legislature in the past, and as such I couldn't pass up the chance to criticize the letter. I wasn't feeling overly nice at the time, so I decided to be a little mean with my reply, because I do stuff like that. I really didn't expect it to get published (even an edited version)

This is what the Journal published:

"Distrust of oilsands industry is not a 'communications' problem

Midge Lambert, Kelsey Re: "What do Torontonians know about Alberta's oilsands?" by Sharon Maclise, Letters, Jan. 11.

While complaining of Torontonians being ignorant of the oilsands and only knowing what is fed to them by the "environmental lobby and the liberal press," Sharon Maclise makes it sound as if all she knows about Ontario is what is fed to her by the media and the Alberta government's propaganda machine.

The next time Maclise steps into her own gas-guzzling vehicle, which was likely produced in Ontario, she should remember that much of Alberta's economy depends on demand from Ontario, just as Ontario's economy is partially dependent on Alberta demand.

D.A. Holmwood, Edmonton"

The Journal of course edited my letter. Apparently tarsands is not a kosher term to use, nor is it kosher to refer to the Journal as a right-leaning or corporate sympathising.
This is what I actually wrote:

"Re: "What do Torontonians know about Alberta's oilsands?"

While complaining of Torontonians being ignorant of the tarsands and only knowing what is fed to them by the "environmental lobby and the liberal press," Sharon Maclise makes it sound as if all she knows about Ontario is what is fed to her by the right-leaning, corporate sympathising Western Canadian media and the Alberta government's propaganda machine and gives the impression that she herself has never been East of the Saskatchewan border.

Maclise should take a long hard look in the mirror before the next time she steps into her own gas-guzzling vehicle, which was likely produced in Ontario, she should remember that much of Alberta's economy depends on demand from Ontario, just as Ontario's economy is partially dependent on Alberta's demands.

D.A. Holmwood, Edmonton"

Ya, I was bored...

Edit: Thanks to Daveberta for pointing out that Midge Lambert, who wrote what Maclise was origionally replying to, was a Green Party candidate.

My PC MLA

2009-01-13T01:21:00.002-07:00

The Alberta Progressive Conservative Caucus (not to be confused with the government) launched their new website on Monday.

I have to say, I'm quite impressed with what the PCs are doing here. Making a move into the world of Web 2.0 is definitely a good move to make, especially as a way to reach out to youth, who as we all know are the group that is least likely to vote, or be involved in the political process.

While Web 2.0 is not a new concept, even in Alberta politics (the NDs and Liberals have both made use of Youtube, Facebook and blogging in the past, as did some of the candidates in the 2006 PC leadership race) but this is certainly the most ambitious undertaking of its kind that I have seen in Alberta.
It will be interesting to see if the PCs manage to keep the site updated on a regular basis, which is essential if they want to ensure people keep coming back to the site. Other attempts in Canadian politics at anything like this (that I have seen at least) have not seemed overly succesful, in my opinion because of the lack of consistent regular updates, therefore providing no reason for potential voters to continue visiting the site.

It will be interesting to see how the Liberals and NDP react to this. I'm hoping this will provide some incentive for all parties to increase their online profile.

Edmonton Considers Anti-Idling Bylaw

2009-01-08T17:20:00.000-07:00

Edmonton is considering implementing an anti-idling bylaw that could see drivers who idle their vehicles for more than three minutes at temperatures higher than -10C facing a fine of $250.

Misconceptions about what this bylaw would mean for drivers are already being spread by either those who are just for some reason opposed to the idea, or who really just don’t understand.

Listening to the radio over the last while, and reading the comments on websites such as CBC. Comments against the bylaw have included statements such as “I should not get a ticket when I am stopped waiting for over 3 minutes because of an accident, a train or construction” “my car needs to warm up or it will be damaged” and the “my car needs to warm up or it will be to cold inside.”

These arguments are just plain stupid. The city is proposing fining people who idle their vehicles, not people who are IN TRAFFIC. If you are stopped for 3 minutes on the road due to something going on somewhere on the road, you are still in traffic, and you would not be fined for your engine running for more than three minutes. As for warming your car up to prevent damage to the engine, for most vehicles, warm-up time does not provide any sort of mechanical advantage for most vehicles at temperatures above -10C. The only advantage this would provide in most cases is warming up the inside to make it more comfortable for the passengers, and I’m sorry, but -10C is really not all that cold, and if you are cold at that temperature it is a sign that you are not dressed properly for the weather. Countless numbers of people stand outside at bus stops and walk at -10C with no ill effects.

I really am not sure if people making these statements are just ignorant, or if they are deliberately spreading misinformation because they do not agree with the idea of an idling bylaw.
I personally think one is needed. Greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere need to be cut down, and while I don’t know how much this measure would actually reduce emissions, something is better than nothing.

The Transportation and Public Works Committee will be discussing the issue next Tuesday.

A Look Back at 2008

2008-12-28T02:34:00.000-07:00

Yes, like everyone and their dog, I'm going to review 2008! Hurrah!

This post will be of a more personal nature though, since anything you want to know about world events in the past year has more than likely been covered by someone else. Also, I didn't blog much in the last year.
The last year was interesting, though I did not do anything super cool, like meeting the premier while working at a stupid grocery store and "inadvertently" breaking his eggs and crushing his bread. That was 2007.

January:
Not to much happend worth mentioning, that I blogged about anyways. I was however nominated to be the Alberta NDP candidate for Strathcona (not to be confused with Edmonton-Strathcona)
I also quit my stupid job at Sobeys'. For the second time...

February:
I went and saw the Lieutenant Governor read the Throne Speech. Then a few minutes after that Stelmach came back and told the Speaker he had asked the Lieutenant-Governor to call an election, which of course he had. This meant:
Alberta Election Time!
The month was filled with announcement by the various parties about what they would do if they were in government.
On a personal level I worked a bit on my campaign in Strathcona. I gathered nomination signatures for myself and attended a forum. I also adventured around Alberta collecting nomination signatures for other NDP candidates (they're hard to get, stupid Conservativeland). I spent most of my time campaigning for Ray Martin though.
Also, I was in a car accident, that was fun.

March:
The Alberta Election had a dissapointing ending. I personally garnered 903 votes (6.01%) of the vote in Strathcona. I beat out the Green Party and Social Credit candidates but finished behind the Liberal and Tory.
Sadly Ray Martin and Dave Eggen lost their seats.
I don't remember much else about March. I probably blocked a lot out.

April:
I did not make a single blog entry, and I do not remember much. This month was filled with finishing essays and projects for school, and final exams, and searching for a job for the summer.
Also, my best friend moved away for four months at the end of the month, which made me sad.

May:
Again, I did not make a single blog entry that I can look back on, and I do not remember much. I think this was the month that the PC's introduced and passed rediculous anti-union legislation, proving how petty they were by attacking working people in the province, mostly for revenge for a campaing run by the AFL and other labour organizations against the PC's during the provincial election.
I also started working at my current job, and my car finally came back from the body shop that it went to in February (stupid busy body shops). Hurray!

June:
The Alberta NDP had their convention in Calgary, which I attended. We elected a new President and passed a bunch of policy resolutions. There was also a party.
Oh, and I turned a year older.

July:
Financial statements for the Alberta Election were released. I spent less than the Tory... what a shock!
I also started looking for a place to live for September. Woohoo!

August:
I found a place to live.
The prospect of a Federal Election being called went up significantly.
Katharine came back from BC!

September:
I moved out of my parents house and into an appartment with my friends Katharine, Mellina.
Then Stephen Harper called an uneccessary election, breaking his own promises to not call one, but did not actually break his own fixed date election law. He did however break the spirit of it.
Also, I went back to school. This meant I had a very busy September and October. I mostly focused on helping with Ray Martin's campaing, when I did do election work, but I did end up also doing some work on Linda Duncan's, and I ended up getting nomination signitures for some candidates (ugh).

October:
The Conservatives, sadly, win another minority government. But Linda Duncan was elected in Edmonton-Strathcona. I also won the office election pool. My predictions were surprisingly accurate. I predicted the Conservatives would win 144 seats (they won 143) the Liberals would win 78 seats (they won 77) the Bloc would win 49 seats (I was dead on), the NDP would win 36 seats (they won 37) and that there would be one independent MP (there ended up being two). What a pointless election.

November:
A very boring month. Until...
...The Tories introduced their Fiscal Update, which... pretty much said nothing and was going to do nothing for the economy, oh but they were going to take funding away from political parties and remove the public-service's right to strike. So the opposition started talking about a coalition...
Also, the New Democratic Youth of Alberta had their convention, and I ended up becoming their Co-Chair.

December:
Was kinda interesting. Their was potential for a Parliamentry and Constiutional crisis. But the Governor General porogued Parliament instead, giving Harper the chance to continue on as Prime Minister at least until January. Then Iggy assended to the Liberal throne.
Then came the holidays, bad weather, and chaos at the airports.
I went to British Columbia for my holidays, first to Vernon, then to Summerland.
Oh, and the best part of December was that my roommates and I adopted a cat.

And that was it for 2008.

Hopefully I will do some sort of 2009 predictions post in the near future.

Harper is a Hypocrite (Surprise Surprise)

2008-12-22T11:26:00.000-07:00

Well, Stephen Harper has once again proven himself to by a hypocrite.
This morning the Prime Minister appointed 18 new Conservative Senators. Today's appointments prove to be particularly hypocritical as Harper has long been a proponent of Senate reform, calling for a Tripple-E Senate. Prior to this Harper had only made two Senate appointments since becoming Prime Minister, appointing Michael Fortier to the Senate as one of his first acts as Prime Minister (yes, he was a hypocrite right from the start) and Bert Brown, the winner of the controversial 2004 Alberta Senate Election.

Harper being a hypocrite and appointing the largest number of Senators ever appointed at a single time in Canadian history should not really come as a surprise. A notable recent example of his hypocrisy came earlier this month, when he criticized the Liberals and the NDP for being willing to work with the Bloc in order to topple his government and form a potential coalition government of their own. He must have forgotten the 14 Conservative motions in the preceding Parliament that passed because of the Bloc's support, or his own willingness to work with the Bloc in 2004 & 2005, which ultimately led to the fall of Paul Martin's government.

Today's hypocrisy also goes against Harper's Reform routes. The old Reform party decried any sort of patronage appointments, but let's take a look at just a few of the people Harper appointed today. While he will attempt to pass them off with the usual line about how they have positively contributed to Canadian society, or are distinguished individuals etc, the appointments are for the most part blatant examples of patronage appointments such as Stephen Green (Nova Scotia), a former Chief of Staff to the Leader of the Reform Party, and Mike Duffey (Prince Edward Island) a CTV News personality who has always had a hard time hiding his Conservative bias.

Personally, I'm all for abolishing the antiquated Senate, but I'll probably write about that later...if I get around to it.

Election Day!

2008-10-14T12:17:00.000-06:00

My seat predictions (just for fun):
Conservative: 124
Liberal: 91
NDP: 39
Green: 0
Bloc: 52
Independent: 2

At the beginning of the election this is what I predicted for an office pool:
Conservatives: 144
Liberals: 78
Bloc: 49
NDP: 36
Green: 0
Independent: 1

Basically, things have changed a lot since the election started. At the beginning it looked like the Conservatives had at least a chance at a majority government (I thought they'd be close), but it's looking like there will be another Conservative minority.
Good job Stephen Harper! Wasting $300 million of taxpayer money so that pretty much everything will stay the same (you might even loose some seats). That's not very fiscally responsible.

On the bright side, I'm thinking that Linda Duncan is going to pull through in Edmonton-Strathcona. Good riddance to Rahim, and good luck to Linda on getting the vote out.

As for me, once I'm done at work I'll be heading over to Edmonton-East to help out with Ray Martin's campaign. Ray has dedicated the last 20 years to representing various parts of eastern Edmonton, first as an MLA (from 1982-1993 and again from 2004-2008), as a school trustee. As Leader of the Official Opposition in the Alberta Legislature from 1986-1993 he also effectivly represented the interests of all Albertan's.
It's unfortunate that Ray likely won't find himself in Ottawa after this election, he certainly would be the best person to represent Edmonton-East out of all the candidates who put their name forward.

Strategic Voting

2008-10-09T03:11:00.000-06:00

Wow, I’ve realized that I haven’t written anything to about the Federal Election, actually, I haven’t been really all that involved with the election at all, which would probably be surprising for most people who know me, but in reality, I’ve felt rather alienated from the political system lately, so I haven’t been particularly motivated to be involved.

Anyways, I think it’s time I actually did write something, so what I am going to address is strategic voting. (yay?)

Predictably, like in every other election, the specter of strategic voting has reared its head. I’ve always had mixed feelings about strategic voting, but prior to this election even strategic voting wasn’t a viable option for myself. My first opportunity to vote was in the 2006 Federal Election, and living in Fort Saskatchewan at the time meant that I was voting in Edmonton-Sherwood Park, where in the 2004 election Ken Epp (Conservative) won 57.86% of the vote, and was projected to win an even larger share in 2006. So, knowing that Ken Epp would, barring some momentous blunder on his own part, or on the part of the Federal Party would be re-elected (strike that, he would have been re-elected no matter what) I could guiltlessly cast my ballot for who I thought was most deserving of it. I was in the same situation in the 2008 Provincial Election, seeing as I was in Fort Saskatchewan-Vegreville, where Ed Stelmach ultimately ended up winning something around 78% of the vote. Municipally it wasn’t even worth voting (though I did end up voting for one councilor) since Fort Saskatchewan elects its six councilors at large, and the choices were pretty much all people with virtually the same positions on issues, which for the most part were positions I did not agree with.

Enter the 2008 Federal Election. I recently moved to Edmonton-Centre, a riding previously held by former Liberal Deputy Prime Minister Anne McLellan who was defeated in 2006 by Conservative Laurie Hawn. Edmonton-Centre is one of only two ridings in Alberta where there is any chance that a party other than the Conservatives can win. The person with the best chance of defeating Laurie Hawn is Liberal Jim Wachowich. So, if one were to strategically vote in Edmonton-Centre with the hopes of defeating the Conservative, Jim Wachowich would be the man to vote for.
I didn’t vote strategically.
Why? Because if I voted strategically, I would not be voting for what I believe in.
Yes, I would like to see the Conservatives out of power, and I would like for my Member of Parliament to not be a Conservative. I however don’t particularly want a Liberal Member of Parliament or a Liberal Government either. I personally don’t feel that Jim Wachowich would be any better at representing me than Laurie Hawn, or at least not to the point that I would vote for him for the sole reason of getting Laurie Hawn out of office, despite how appealing it is to send an F.U. to the Conservative by sending a non-Conservative to Ottawa to represent an Alberta riding. On a national level I’m also not convinced that Stéphane Dion would be all that much better at the helm than Stephen Harper, better yes, but not much.
I voted for Donna Martyn (in the advance polls). No, Donna doesn’t have a chance at winning, but of the candidates I could have voted for, what she represents is closest to what I believe in. Donna Martyn is also, in my opinion, out of the five candidates in Edmonton-Centre the one who I feel is most deserving of being an MP and the one who has been most dedicated to her community. In short, Donna Martyn actually earned my vote, she didn’t get it just because she’s the candidate who’s most likely to defeat the candidate I like the least, which would have been the case had I voted for Wachowich.

No, the NDP is not innocent of pulling the strategic vote card either. In Edmonton-Strathcona, New Democrat Linda Duncan has a very good chance at defeating incumbent Conservative Rahim Jaffer. In 2006 Jaffer won the riding with less than 5,000 more votes than Duncan. Linda Duncan received almost twice as many votes as the Liberal candidate in 2006, and the combined NDP/Green/Liberal vote far exceeded the number of votes won by Jaffer. Logically then, Linda Duncan is the best choice for those hoping to defeat Jaffer. However, like in Edmonton-Center, I think Duncan needs to earn the support of Liberals and Greens, rather than receive their support simply because she has the best chance at defeating the Tory. I personally think Linda is the best candidate in Strathcona, but not everyone necessarily thinks that.

So personally, I don’t like the idea of strategic voting, and I don’t think that it’s a good solution for keeping those who you do not want in power out. If you vote strategically you still loose in the end. Really, what Canada needs is a complete overall of the electoral system. Strategic voting is really just a way of giving into the flaws of the system we have, and doing nothing to correct it.
Our electoral system is broken. In 2006 nearly 5% of Canadians voted for a party that ultimately did not win any seats in Parliament. 17.5% of Canadians voted for a party that ultimately won less than 10% of the seats in Parliament, while a party that only 10.5% of Canadians voted for received 17.5% of the seats.

Ranting about the electoral system itself is something I’ll leave for another day though.

Alberta Election '08

2008-03-04T23:36:00.000-07:00

So, I really have neglected this blog for the last 28 days, it's just been crazy for this past month.

As I mentioned before, I was the Alberta NDP candidate in Strathcona. I got 903 votes, or about 6.01% of the vote. This is about where I expected to be, and while it is below the provincial average for the number of votes won by the NDP, it is in line with how the NDP faired in other rural constituencies. So no, I did not expect to win, and this was definitely an interesting experience and an opportunity I am very grateful to have had.
I especially enjoyed speaking with the constituents of Strathcona who I did manage to meet at the door during the small amount of door knocking that I did do, as well as the ones who came out to the forum.

I really would like to thank all of my friends and my family for all of the support that they've given me over the campaign, I really appreciate the understanding you've had when it came to me not being around to often, or to dealing with me when I was really wound up and stressed out. There are a few people I want to make particular note of. The first person is Katharine, who ran in the neighboring constituency of Sherwood Park against Iris Evans. It was really great to have one of my closest friends running at the same time nearby because it meant I had someone to bounce ideas off of, and to to rant with about everything. I also want to thank Anand, who was my official agent, and Brian, one of the organizers at the central office for answering a lot of the questions I had and for putting a lot of my anxieties to rest.

Now, in terms of the overall results of the election, especially the seat counts, I am absolutely shocked, and I am very disappointed with the ridiculously low 41% voter turnout. Along with what seemed to be the common opinion, I really did not expect the Conservatives to pick up any seats, let alone as many as they did. I also did not expect the NDP to loose two of our four seats. I thought that the worst case scenario would be that we would keep the seats we went into the election with. I actually expected us to pick up one or two seats.

On that note, I want to pay tribute to Ray Martin and David Eggen, who both lost their seats last night. Ray and Dave were two of the hardest working people in the legislature, and it just won't be the same there without them. I've had the opportunity to get to know these two men over the last couple years, and they both worked extremely hard, not only for their own constituents, but for all Albertan's.
I unfortunately didn't get a chance to help out at all in Edmonton-Calder with Dave's campaign, but I did manage to spend a number of evenings in Beverly-Clairview working on Ray's campaign. I really though the reception on the doorstep for Ray tended to be positive and I was absolutely shocked, along with many others, that he did not win on Monday. Both Dave and Ray spent countless hours on the doorsteps of their constituents listening to their concerns and meeting with as many of them as possible.
Both Dave and Ray were excellent MLA's and extremely high quality candidates, and I hope they will consider running again in the future, because the people of this province really need people like them representing their interests.

While we did suffer a setback on Monday, the NDP has suffered larger setbacks in the past, and I am sure that just like in the past, we will recover from this.

Parliament Resumes Today! and Some Other Things

2008-01-28T13:50:00.000-07:00

Yes, Parliament will begin sitting again today, which means Canada's involvement in Afghanistan and the Mulroney Schreiber Affair will be back in the spotlight, among other things. This also means that there will be more to blog about in the coming days.

In regards to Afghanistan, Stephen Harper said today that he "broadly supports" the recommendations that were put forward in the report by the Independent Pannel on Canada's Future Role in Afghanistan which was chaired by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley. Though exactly what he means by "broadly supports" remains to be seen. He still seems to be committed to holding a vote in Parliament on the issue. The NDP, who advocate an immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the Bloc will vote against extending the mission beyond 2009.
The Liberals however still seem to be flip-flopping on the issue.
I personally think it's time for Canada to leave.

In Alberta, the Alberta Legislature is scheduled to resume sitting next week, with the Speech from the Throne set for next Monday. Whether the legislature will sit at all remains to be seen as Stelmach is expected to call an election by mid February and there is a possibility he will call it immediately after the Throne Speech is delivered. Or he may wait until his budget is introduced later in the month.

On another note, today is the 20th anniversary of the Supreme Court ruling in Regina vs. Morgentaler which decriminalized abortion in Canada. However a woman's right to choose is still severely restricted due to the lack of accessibility of abortion services. Rural women still face particular hardship as facilities that can perform abortions are virtually non-existent in rural areas, and the provinces in most cases refuse to cover travel expenses for women who have to travel to obtain an abortion. Accessibility is not just an issue for rural women, PEI has no abortion clinics whatsoever, and some major cities such as Edmonton, have only one clinic. Other provinces such as New Brunswick have restrictions such as requiring a referral from two doctors to obtain an abortion. Many provinces also refuse to cover abortions performed in private clinics, which further restricts access for low-income women, and some refuse to perform abortions on women from out of province, or to cover abortions obtained out of province.
So, 20 years after abortion was decriminalized in Canada, women still face hurdles in order to exercise their right to choice. So while women do have the right to exercise to choose, whether they have the ability to exercise this right is still a question.

It's Election Time (Almost)

2008-01-23T15:08:00.000-07:00

Well, it's official. I'm going to be a candidate in the upcoming provincial election. Last night the NDP constituency associations for Strathcona and Sherwood Park held a joint nomination meeting and I was nominated to be the candidate in Strathcona and my friend Katharine was nominated in Sherwood Park.

The Progressive Conservative incumbent is retiring so I will be up against fellow newcomer Dave Quest for the PC's and Jon Friel for the Liberals.

I am looking forward to what I am sure will be a very interesting and rewarding experience. As someone who has lived in the area for most of my life I have witnessed what years of cut backs and mismanagement on the part of the Tories has done. Rural schools throughout the constituency have been closed and many students are forced to endure long rides to schools in other parts of the county. Upgraders for refining tar sands have been built with total disregard for the environment, farmers living nearby and local workers, and more will be built in the near future. Housing prices and rents in the area have also increased at astronomical rates and it is becoming harder and harder for ordinary working families to find a place to live.

Local residents have been forced to go through these hardships, while the oil companies building upgraders and working in the area benefit from the natural resources that belong to all Albertans and pay ridiculously low royalty rates on them The PCs refuse to raise royalty rates to a level that we deserve. The NDP is the only party willing to demand that Albertans get a fair share of royalties.

The NDP is also the only party with a plan to bring rent prices under control and assure that housing remains affordable for all Albertans.

I am excited to be representing the NDP because they are the only party that can be trusted to represent ordinary working Albertans.

Transit in the Edmonton Region

2008-01-19T13:08:00.000-07:00

Edmonton's new transportation manager has outlined his plans for a major expansion of the LRT in both Edmonton and the Edmonton region.

His plans include proposals for a northwest line from downtown (likely starting at Churchill) to NAIT and the Royal Alex with the potential to eventually reach St. Albert. The plans also includes extending the current line to the south so that it goes beyond Anthony Henday Drive and will possibly eventually reach the International Airport as well as expanding it to the northeast to Fort Saskatchewan.

Hopefully this, along with plans for LRT expansion to the west will be accepted by Edmonton council, and hopefully the province and federal government will contribute funds to get these projects underway. The projects extending beyond Edmonton's city limits would also likely need the support of the communities they are extending to, and Fort Saskatchewan for one, has shown itself to not consider transit a priority.

The lack of support for transit in Fort Saskatchewan, coupled with a $16.50/month increase on a bus pass that will now cost $155.00 (or an increase from $80 to $89 for a pass that's only good from Fort Saskatchewan to Clairview), and an increase of $0.50 to $3.50 for a one way non-transferable one way trip from Fort Saskatchewan to Clairview has upset transit users who feel they are already being overcharged and underserved by the existing commuter bus service.

I used this service in the past, but have stopped because of the inconvenience of a transit service which does not run at all between 8AM and 3:30PM on weekdays, with a final departure from Clairview to Fort Saskatchewan at 6:30PM. I just could not justify paying that much for a bus pass for such low service levels. As for weekend service, there was none at all. The service also cannot be used at all to travel within Fort Saskatchewan.
I wonder how many more people would use the service if the hours were extended and prices for a pass was set at a more reasonable rate. I know I would. Unfortunately I cannot justify using Fort Saskatchewan's service the way it is now, and will continue to drive to Edmonton instead, until I move to Edmonton, which I hope to do at the end of this school year. So Fort Saskatchewan will be losing at least one resident, with the abysmal transit service being at least one factor in this situation, so one has to wonder how many other residents(and future taxpayers) they have lost, and how many people will chose to live in other communities in the first place with this being one of their key reasons.

It's worth noting that Sherwood Park and St. Albert residents pay under $70/month for a pass that gives them full access to all of Edmonton Transit's services, service throughout their own communities and regular service to Edmonton on weekdays and weekends. Meanwhile Fort Saskatchewan comes nowhere near offering service like this, and charges nearly twice as much.

The provincial government also needs to step forward and provide more funding for transit. Much smaller communities in B.C. and Ontario are able to provide their residents with full bus service because of provincial funding.

Increased transit services are needed not only because they encourage people to move into a community and current residents to stay, but because they relive traffic congestion (which is becoming more and more of an issue in Fort Saskatchewan). A decrease in the number of cars on the road is also of course good for the environment. Transit is also essential for those who cannot afford their own vehicle but need to commute to work (or school) because they also cannot afford housing near their place of employment, or prefer to live in a particular community.

Democrats in Michigan and Florida Don't Count

2008-01-18T17:38:00.000-07:00

The Democratic National Committee (DNC) has decided not to accept any delegates from Florida and Michigan at the Democratic National Convention that will be held later this year to finalize the democrats selection for a candidate for the presidency because these two states held their democratic primaries prior to February 5th. Under DNC rules only Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada, and South Carolina can hold their primaries prior to February 5th.

These state's Democratic Committees decided to move the dates of their primaries forward because they felt it would give them more of a say in who would ultimately be selected as the Democratic Party's candidate for president.

This effectively means that Democrats in these states will have absolutely no say in who their party's candidate for the presidency is.

Not only are these people losing their say in who will be running for president, but this move may alienate Democratic supporters in two states that have had relatively close results in recent presidential elections.

It's interesting to note that the Republican Primaries in these states were held at the same time.

While we're on the topic of the US, apparently the Bureau of Indian Affairs doesn't have internet access.

Health Canada Doesn't "Ban" They "Exclude"

2008-01-18T17:18:00.000-07:00

So, Health Canada has clarified their policy regarding MSM (men who have sex with men) as organ donors. Apparently, like those with other "high risk" lifestyles they don't actually "ban" them from being organ donors, they "exclude" them.
Apparently if someone is "excluded" they can still donate an organ as long as the recipient gives their informed consent, and a transplant medical practitioner must approve the donation.
So, in reality while it's still possible for a "high risk" individual to donate an organ, the donation can potentially be blocked by the homophobic biases of the recipient or a transplant medical technician.

Stelmach's Washington Adventures

2008-01-16T12:19:00.000-07:00

Well, I thought it was bad that Iris Evans spent over $100 000 last year on travel expenses, but it seems that Premier Stelmach managed to spend half that amount in one trip to Washington.

Stelmach, his wife, the agriculture minister, the minister of sustainable resources and three staffers made the trip to Washington to promote the tar sands to US government officials. The $54 000 included hosting a reception.

While it is likely possible to justify spending this amount of money to travel to Washington and host a reception which could possibly result in significantly more than $54 000 in increased business in the tar sands (though the environmental and social impacts of further foreign investment in the tar sands would not be ideal), you do have to wonder why the premier's wife went along. I doubt that her expertise was needed to deal with officials in Washington, so it seems that she really just went along for the free vacation in Washington. I think she was really just there for the touring of monuments that the delegation spent Wednesday morning doing.

I'm not sure what the argument for taking her along was. It could have been that they took one of the government's aircraft or chartered a flight and there was an extra seat on board. Even if that is the case however, there is still the issue of her expensive restaurant meals, and accommodation. Also if there was an extra seat why not take another minister or staffer along who could actually perform some sort of government business. That's assuming she filled an extra seat, if they took a commercial airline to Washington then her seat cost has also been transferred to Alberta's taxpayers. Either way, Alberta taxpayers still ended up paying for a vacation for Mrs. Stelmach.

It is interesting to know that U.S. federal agencies are now forbidden from buying fuel for their vehicles that is made from non-conventional oil unless the life cycle of its greenhouse gas emissions is the same or less than conventional oil. Perhaps this will encourage oil companies operating in the tar sands here to curb their greenhouse gas emissions. Although nothing prevents them from selling to consumers and corporations in the US, so it may not make much of a difference.

Gay Organs Are No Good?

2008-01-13T18:38:00.000-07:00

Earlier this week it was brought to light that new Health Canada Regulations bar homosexual men from becoming organ donors, unless they've abstained from sex for at least five years.
This means that when it comes to donating organs, as with donating blood, homosexual males are being placed in the same category as inter-venous drug users and those who buy or sell sex.

I completely agree that both organ and blood donors need to be screened to prevent the spread of infectious diseases to those who are receiving organs or blood products. Having a six month waiting period prior to donating blood for those who've recently had tattoos or piercings makes sense. As does banning those who have engaged in "high-risk" behavior such as using injected drugs or buying and selling sex makes sense, however I don't consider gay sex to be a high risk activity. It seems to amount to little more than homophobia.
If gay sex is so high risk, why are the standards applied not consistent between Health Canada's organ donation policies and Canadian Blood Service's blood donor programs? Why is it considered safe for a man who has had sex with another man to donate an organ if they've abstained from gay sex for five years, but if they've had sex with another man at any point since 1977 they can't donate blood? Why does a woman who has had sex with a man who has had sex with another man only receives a six month ban (yes they actually ask women if they've had sex with a man who has had sex with another man)?
While reading comments on other blogs as well as on forums and yes even facebook groups this week I have seen some attempts to justify these bans, though none of them really seem all that logical.
The most common one is that a disproportionate amount of homosexual men are infected with AIDS or HIV in comparison to the general population. This however is a trend that has been changing and in fact heterosexual women are the fastest growing group in terms of being infected with HIV or AIDS. I don't believe that if another group would be banned, say heterosexual men, if they were the group most likely to have HIV or AIDS.
Another argument has been that the transmission of infectious diseases occurs most easily during anal sex in comparison to other forms of intercourse. This argument also does not work as heterosexual couples are also capable of, and do engage in anal sex.

One worrying thing I have seen while reading the various comments and postings however has been for some to call on people to rip up their donor cards and refuse to donate organs or blood until homosexual men can. I don't agree with a tactic such as this as it hurts those who need blood products and organs rather than those with the power to change these policies. Fortunately there doesn't seem to be an organized movement and just seems to be what a few individuals are saying, who would (hopefully) change their minds if they actually thought the position through.

With such a critical shortage of blood products and organs I find it ridiculous that many perfectly good donors are being turned away simply because of their sexual orientation. Individuals should never be denied the opportunity to donate, and recipients should never be denied their right to live, because of sexual orientation of potential donors.

Oh and for a good laugh check out this group.

Tory Favoritism and Big Spending

2008-01-12T02:11:00.000-07:00

And on a provincial level it seems that the PC's have playing favorites again with businesses with Tory connections. This time it seems that Highwood Communications Ltd. has held the government's media buying contract for over a decade, and their owner Barry Styles is listed as a member of the PC election campaign team. Highwood has received $41.3 million over this time period. Alberta NDP leader Brian Mason has called on the Auditor General to conduct a special review of the contract and report back before the next provincial election.

It also seems that Iris Evans ma naged to spend over $100 000 on traveling last year. It seems absurd for one minister to spend so much more than any of the other ministers.
This reminds me of previous controversy which arouse over abuse of government owned planes, not only by ministers but also by government members and staff, which was something the Tories managed to keep under wraps until after the 2004 election.
Travel is a necessary part of conducting government business, but common sense has to be used.