This is a great line: "Further, Alberta isn't a particularly ideologically conservative place. This is a point I keep on trying to make to no avail to partisans."
I think that's true for most of Canada and moreover, it's true across the ideological specrtum. Most Canadians don't really care about political ideology. We're a fairly pragmatic people who seem to want stability, prosperity and for things to work -- peace, order and good government.
We're not getting as much of that as we probably want lately, which seems to motivate politicians to go harder on ideology. But, what matters -- what we actually care about -- is governments who deliver the stuff that actually touches our lives. A LOT of that is actually on how well the government and the public service can work together. But, ideologues (on both sides) tend to like to spout easy-sounding, difficult-to-deliver solutions that ulimately fail.
Of course, most public policy challenges that matter to people are actually complex and not easy to solve. Inflation, deficits, climate change, pandemic response, productivity -- all require pretty difficult trade-offs and defy easy solutions. Anybody that promises easy solutions is probably not being entirely honest!
...that Canada in general is not that ideological, or rather, we just want efficiency; we'll sacrifice our weak ideological commitment if it gets results.
Michael Adams of Environics has documented how a single, dramatic measure of authoritarian attitudes ("Father of the family must be master in his own house", yes/no?) varies only modestly across Canada, but very sharply in the US.
An excellent piece of analysis. Gerson is a fine writer, always look forward to her material. As to Kenney - or O'Toole for that matter - always important to remember that trying to keep everyone happy is almost always a mistake. He should have had the backbone to stand up to the most divisive members of his caucus and let the chips fall where they may. As it is, I don't know who in their right mind would want to lead the federal or Alberta Conservative parties, as long as they seem bent on purging each other.
"What's the value in being an ideological conservative if your dogma doesn't produce the results you promise to the electorate?"
Yeah, exactly.
Maybe THE fundamental problem with Conservatives in Canada is their fixation on being "Conservative". When you do that, you are automatically creating a divide, a sort of club you have to join to be one of the cool kids. You're in a bubble that effectively contains your group and acts as resistance against others coming in.
People don't necessarily want to join your college campus club of nerd-Cons. They just want competency, good judgement, and hopefully some minimum of integrity.
Politics is like economics: if its in the news, you're doing it wrong.
Stephen Harper didn't become Prime Minister by slamming one of Friedrich Hayek's books on a table and saying "this is what we believe" the way Margaret Thatcher did. He did it partially because the federal Liberals were burned out, but more because his campaign had clear, focused messaging on a few key platform details that were easy for voters to understand and projected an image of calm, responsible competence. When people were anxious and worried during the 2008 recession, that same image of competence helped Harper win again, and eventually gain a majority in 2011.
Libs, like Cons before them, are benefiting from a rudderless opposition.
I remember Harper's original messaging in 2006: 5 (or 6, can't remember) major promises, relatively clearly defined. It was effective.
Unfortunately, he didn't realize what Americans already know: after about 8 or so years of government, even your supporters are starting to get tired of you. His refusal to anoint a successor is partly responsible for the Trudeau years. We could have been talking about PM Ambrose by now
That's one very broad definition of "broadly in line" death rate. It was double that of BC next door.
The gross numbers only appear to be 50% higher (4452/3447 but for 15% less population than BC), but it's really double, because BC has so many more old people, like myself and 3 friends who spent our young, productive, high-tax years in AB, then promptly moved to BC to inflict our aging bodies on its health-care system. When I went through the number of people over 70 in each province, the death rate in Alberta is really double that of BC.
(The attached horrid graphic is intended to be funny. Honest.)
I don't actually blame JK for that death rate, "worst summer" and all. Alberta is *obviously* a different ideology, as shown by their lower vaccination rate, despite the government never dissing that, always encouraging it. The difference between urban and rural vaccination rates is an even clearer marker that it is cultural, not government-driven.
Jason's "open soon" attitudes and programs didn't help, but they were a symptom of the pressures he was under, not the root cause of the problem. People in Alberta took the pandemic less seriously, distanced less, restricted contacts less. Similar stories across the 3 prairie provinces, again, contrast the rural vaccination and death rates.
Forgot to admit: the above is irrelevant to Jen's political-electability topic. "Pandemic performance" is sadly unconnected to political popularity. Nobody bumped off more Canadians that Legault. By far. Quebec's death rate is double Alberta's, double Canada's, i.e. nearly 3 times the "Rest of Canada's". And nobody is more-certain of reelection. I will never understand Quebec.
BC radically changed the death-rate definition several weeks back and the stats are now worthless; but up to that point, they were quite comparable, both based on deaths "of" COVID, not "with".
With respect, if you don't provide links and details with a comment like that, you're denigrating the data provided without really providing a reason, much less a correction.
A good overview of why Kenney rose and fell - much better than the 'he was a true conservative who was pushed out by a bunch of kooks' narrative that others are pushing. I don't think Alberta is ungovernable. I don't even think the UCP is unmanageable - though that is clearly the harder task. It does require an ability to be open and form a consensus from the variety of tribes that live under the broad 'conservative tent' in Alberta. Ralph Klein did it. So did Peter Lougheed (though the composition of the 'conservative tribes under the tent' was quite different back then). Unfortunately, it only took a couple of months into Kenney's Premiership to see that his idea of consensus-building was that he would be the coachman, hold the reins and crack the whip while everyone else could get in harness and pull. That was never going to work for long, COVID or no COVID.
There's surely an irony that the leader most like Klein since he left office is Rachel Notley (though I doubt she's appreciate the comparison). Not only does she relate well to 'severely normal Albertans' but her political skills in holding together her own centre-left coalition AND making it look easy are very Klein-like. It's not often as discussed, but the centre-left in Alberta is easily as disjointed as the centre-right. Yet she's united those tribes and has held them together through four years of government and three years of opposition with nary a peep of dissent. If I could offer one piece of advice to any would-be conservative leader looking to 'unite' the UCP, I would say, "Look across the aisle for an example of both the qualities needed and how to do it."
The big difference is that the NDP caucus is mostly comprised of people in way over their heads who will never hold even remotely comparable jobs. They go along with the leader because they have virtually no skills or confidence to do anything other than follow.
Part of the problem with welcoming libertarians into the tent, and I say this as a libertarian, is that they tend to be independent minded, contrarian and outspoken. Kenney gave these people far to much leeway.
I suspect one of Kenney’s problems is that there’s a growing, near irreconcilable gulf between urban and rural Albertans. Political power and population used to be fairly evenly split between the groups back in the glory days of Peter Lougheed, but was significantly tilting towards cities by the time Klein came to power. The rural caucus is disproportionately strong in the UCP, but can’t carry the province.
Back to topic (sorry; pandemic stats are a fussbudget trigger).
No analyst should try to get around what Kenney could not: the Kook Factor. At least Jason, as he went down in flames, called them out with the K word.
It's so very hard for me to believe that smart people could possibly have believed in the "War Room" narrative; they had to have been cynical politicians selling a Tale. It was a conspiracy theory, furcrissakes. A conspiracy, presumably with American oil behind it (cui bono?), to use green protests as a cover for landlocking our oil, to improve their sales. That most of the "green movement" were really dupes, funded by foreign frackers. That was the nub of it.
It was easily debunked, before the War Room even started up business, and never made a serious defense of the conspiracy theory. It may be the first time millions in public funds have been spent to chase and promote a conspiracy theory, at least since the Red Scares.
I really think that Kenney and his staff had to sit around at some point, figuring out how to placate and inspire the Kooks with a gesture, like building a wall to keep out nonexistent Caravans, a giant virtue signal.
American Republicans had to walk that tightrope for 35 years, since White Evangelicals flipped to Republican to vote for Reagan. They had to throw them bones, gestures, (always cultural, never economic) on topics like race, women, gays and immigrants. But now, the Republicans have fallen off that tightrope, and their party got eaten by those they'd pandered to.
Jason was still pandering, with a theatrical re-opening in the face of full ICUs, in mid-February, I think he hoped that would break the Coutts blockade. They sneered at the gesture.
I don't think the UCP can pander any longer; they've got to draw a clear divide, as the feds did when Bernier had to go off with his few percent. Whether that costs an election or two, is just too bad; you can't build a party on conspiracy theories and denial. It won't last.
Why then is Canada the only country that can not get pipelines built? US and every other country has put them in a dime a dozen. Go take a look at how many US pipeline miles there are and then take a look at Canada’s. Please explain perhaps why only Canada has an environmental movement that stops all building of pipelines? Where does the money come from to allow them such a wide reach as it’s country wide? Perhaps you can explain such a phenomenon? I know that one day every single Canadian will regret their lack of knowledge or care for the one industry that is the very reason we are still here, living, and working as without it we shall not live long. No solar and wind will never sustain life on earth as we know it, not with the amount of people on it. Depopulation of a grand style, such a pandemic, may aid in culling the weak but it will take more than one. Perhaps a war will aid in depopulating enough to make the numbers work and perhaps euthanasia laws. Everything helps but it would have to be made much broader than that as people in poorer countries continue to have children. Starving them with a pandemic, war, and no supply chain, is most likely helpful but there would still be a significant population that survive mass starvation. I am sure with the politicians of the day and their deep affiliation to power, wealth, they will come up with some brilliant solutions to depopulate earth further. They are doing well so far but a little more ingenuity is necessary in order to allow them to make their choice a viable alternative. Just stopping use of all fossil fuels will deplete the people down to a reasonable amount so I am sure that will be next. You’ll have to get back to me on that, along with why only Canada can not build pipelines.
It’s the utter stagnation of thought that will kill off man kind and their belief that truth comes from the government and media. Perhaps that is what is necessary to depopulate the world enough for the political elites to build back better.
I'll confess, I didn't read your entire post. But, to answer your original question -- Canada can get pipelines built. We're building one right now to the west coast on the taxpayer's dime, if I'm not mistaken!
It is hard to get jusisdiction-spanning infrastructure built, for sure. Certainly, the uncertainly around Indigenous land claims and a real need to address their concerns in areas covered by treaties is a complication, but it's necessary. Crossing provincial boundaries is also challenging, but a lot of that is baked into the fabric of Confederation.
A bigger challenge is that pipelines are really expensive and projects are sensitive to swings in commodity prices. The reason you and I are paying for a pipeline is because the process of getting a pipeline signed off is long and complicated and the market for oil softened during that process. The company looked at the risks, potential returns and other opportunities and bailed on the project. The government hope is that building it will de-risk the project and we'll get our money back; the history of the privatization of these projects leaves me very skeptical! We'll see.
The notion that this is a uniquely Canadian challenge also doesn't past the smell test. Keystone XL was cancelled by the US, not us. And, there is an ongoing legal battle with Michigan to try to keep open an existing pipeline that supplies a lot of eastern Canada with western Canadian petroleum (Line 5) due to environmental concerns in that state.
So ... pipelines are risky, difficult and expensive to build and there's lots of good, difficult-to-change reasons for that ... In Canada and elsewhere. Well, I imagine building pipelines in China is much, much easier, but there are other challenges there ;-).
We have no federation. Nor can you call this a country. We can not get anything done because they don't want to get it done. Period. You know that as well as I. Where there is will, there is a way but because this federation no longer exists, there is none.
They have destroyed our once celebrated Constitution and our Charter. They are no longer sacred, they have ceased to exist under the Governments today. It will never be again what it was, nor what we had hoped for. Canada is dead and it can not be retrieved from the ashes, regardless of what you believe. You mistake ideals for truth and they are not the same. Not at all.
TMX is not done nor will it be under the Trudeau Regime. Our supply of COVID vaccines was done at a massive cost to every Canadian and the forced vaccination continues due to the nine vaccines the Government bought for every Canadian and the trial Trudeau has us under for digital ID in Canada along with facial recognition for every Canadian. Pharma care already exists in Canada and always has. Its done Provincially so they continue to waste Canadian's tax dollars on things we don't need, like Pharma care and Daycare, instead of our Health system which is a mess along with the country, personal debt, and the countries debt, not to mention the unaffordability to live. Brilliant to bring in unnecessary programs to financially burdened a Federation, country, Post National State or what ever you care to call this large form of land we live on. Mark my words. Government can not run a one car parade and people want them to run their lives. That's frightening as is the direction this place is headed. I suggest folks buy something that has worth other than money like gold or land as we are headed for disaster. That will be the legacy of this regime in Ottawa.
...if Alberta's environmental groups got $40M, then it was just 1% of that one environmentalist fund; we were not even a high priority. Your conspiracists have names like Hewlett, Rockefeller, and Bloomberg.
The National Observer? Really? Like there are no ideological reasons or twists to their stories or any other environmental news organization? So you believe the rhetoric from their biased news but not facts and figures from the other side. You don't think they might be attempting to save their own bacon and will take their word as gospel? Really? Yet Conservative are biased. lol
The link is not to the NO, but to the announcement of the actual $4B environmental philanthropy funds, which really exist. It doesn't matter if your attention is drawn to a fact by Donald Trump or Karl Marx; it's still a fact.
And the fact is, anti-oilsands funding is easily explained by the many environmental lobby donors that have existed for many years; no sneaky American oil companies required.
It was an unusually DUMB conspiracy theory, in that most of them are impossible to falsify. (Prove there are no aliens.) This one was easily debunked.
The theory originally came from Glenn Beck so Kenney spent $3.5 million of Albertan's money to conclude that Beck is unreliable. That's some fiscal responsibility!
Your theory is not a theory at all. Nor did it come from Glen Beck. The Person who investigated and reported on these facts was Vivian Krause. She was a once activists that found this information while digging into financial dealings to stop the Salmon Farms in BC.
Facts do matter. Of course the Activists, Government, mainstream media and all involved would debunk anything resembling truth or tell everyone its just another Conspiracy theory. Yes and the people they continue to believe in the Government of Canada being thier saviour when in deed they, the activists, elites, and those "who"decide your freedom is no longer in the best interests of the planet and demand compliance above all.
Yes and that is exactly what the report says. The Rockefellers were oil producers for a very long time and their wealth and influence is known by all. Just as Justin Trudeau's grandfather and the wealth of his family was made from oil. Funny how those who are wealthy because of it demonize it, and attempt to destroy it. Its like the idea that the bank of Canada is owned by the Rothchild's but the bank is deemed, independent. These are not conspiracy theories sir, they are facts.
I guess the Rockefellers, who divested from oil six years ago, have a plan to get back into oil after the Canadian oil industry has been destroyed by their environmentalist puppets. Alas, the Canadian oil industry exported more in 2019 than any in history, just like several years before that, as we've done nothing but grow production until the pandemic.
I can't imagine why anybody would bother to complain about such an utterly unsuccessful conspiracy. It's like hearing that there was actually a conspiracy to badmouth Vancouver as a filming location, all around Hollywood, try to get filming back to California. Why get angry? They failed.
They are not conspiracy theories they are actually proven facts. Of course you would never take the time to read the report because you deemed it a conspiracy theory before it even came out. That is the fault of the biased media. These are facts, not conspiracies with actual proof. If your completely led by the biased media your a part of the problem. You don’t get Jane Fonda coming to The Oilsands to make nice and you do know she is tight with the Rockefeller's. Close personal friend actually but why allow facts to distort what the Liberal/NDP Coalition regime and its paid for media say. Instead they must stop all misinformation on the internet. Like China playing with a virus with funding from Eco Science and it accidentally escapes the lab in Wuhan is a Conspiracy Theory too. Stop that Misinformation! Lol
Because Canada is the only democratic country whose media is so monolithic that the managerial technocrats can actually succeed at labelling everyone who disagrees with them "kooks" and keeping them down. It might have something to do with the fact that our entire media apparatus is state funded.
Kenney could have been Canada's Ron DeSantis, who was proven categorically right about Covid - same mortality record as comparable states, far better performance on human rights and the economy.
DeSantis showed courage, and is now a very popular governor and presidential contender. Kenney lost his nerve, and now he has lost his job.
Terrific article. This is just what I subscribe to The Line for! A few points:
-Ms. Gerson's best point is that we're not even that ideologically conservative. Our politicians have been saying and doing things for decades that would have ruined their careers in the American Bible Belt on everything from gay marriage to public healthcare to abortion, and they've suffered little to no political consequences. If anything, it's moving towards social conservatism that'll kill you, even in Alberta.
-In their letter explaining why they decided not to go ahead with their mine, Teck Resources explicitly said that one of the major reasons was because Alberta nixed its carbon tax. I can almost see Preston Manning facepalming in frustration while muttering "I told you so" under his breath, particularly when raging socialists like Jack Mintz have also come out in favour of carbon taxes. Manning has been trying for years to get his fellow conservatives to be more assertive on the environment, and Teck Resources arguably vindicated him.
-The funny thing about equalization that Kenney probably hoped we'd all forget is that it was his government, led by Stephen Harper, that established the current equalization formula. I agree that equalization needs an overhaul, but Kenney was basically demanding that Trudeau clean up the mess he and Harper made in the first place.
-As much as right-wing partisans might have hated Rachel Notley, her stances on resource development kind of made her a black sheep in NDP circles in the rest of Canada. And she actually left resource rates the way they were, while Peter Lougheed was the one who actually raised them back in the day.
-I wonder if, instead of the decades-long periods of one political party being the only viable one in Alberta, we'll become like the other Western provinces with the NDP and a conservative party constantly rotating in and out of government and swapping sides in the legislature. Having multiple competitive parties can only help our democracy. Even if you prefer having a conservative party in office, a progressive opposition will keep it on its toes and force it to remain competitive.
What makes Alberta seem ungovernable and, for that matter, even Canada, is not its citizens. The issue is the First-Past-the-Post electoral system. FPtP, perversely, rewards politicians who traffic in divisiveness and discord.
If Alberta and Canada, for that matter, adopted one of the proportional representation election systems recommended by citizens assemblies, mixed member proportional or single transferable votes, the perverse incentives that seem to make Alberta ungovernable would mostly vanish.
The problem is not Alberta nor Albertans nor politicians nor political parties, it's the FPtP electoral system.
Alberta is not unique. FPtP degrades politics everywhere that it is in use.
I'm not quite sure that's true. There are places with proportional systems that still struggle with establishing stable governments. Israel was a good example of that for a while. I believe Belgium is another one.
You'll notice that I was specific about the type of proportional representation I was suggesting: mixed member proportional and single transferable vote. Neither Belgium nor Israel uses either of these systems.
Moreover, you might take note that during all the time Israel and Belgium's politicians struggled to "form a government," their respective countries functioned just fine.
Legislators and legislatures don't run the government. Concerns about stable legislatures ought not be confused with well-functioning government. Since 2019, Canada has not had a "stable" government under First-Past-the-Post. It has had a minority government, nonetheless the government was perfectly able to provide all the goods, services, and benefits Canadians expect and to which Canadians are entitled, despite all the high drama in the legislature.
Despite the conflation of words, 'government' and 'legislature' are quite different things. A well-functioning government in an advanced democracies like Canada, Belgium, and Israel don't depend on a stable legislatures.
Proportional rep sounds perfect but it’s actually impossible to govern effectively when you have too many bodies at the table, each insisting on their own favourite dish being served. Add to that the astounding methods used in most places that are, in effect, undemocratic.
PR is a recipe for unstable governance. If you want a better way to elect our governments, then a preferential system is a middle way. To those who will point at Australia where there is a push to replace the current Preferential system, you need to be aware that that country is actually in turmoil, for a whole lot of reasons. I wonder if that’s the real reason for the debate. Heaven knows, Scott-from-marketing is a dab hand at the look-the-other-way ruse.
Your claim that "PR is a recipe for unstable governance" is not valid. You're confusing the notion of an unstable legislature, like the one we've had in Canada since 2019 with unstable government. Legislatures and governments are very different things. Canada, it's worth mentioning, managed the COVID-19 very well compared to other countries despite an unstable 'minority government.'
Moreover, in countries that use the PR systems I mentioned in my comment and that were recommended for Canada by citizens' assemblies--Single Transferable Vote and Mixed Member Proportional--there are not 'too many bodies at the table, each insisting on their own favourite dish being served.'
There are the right number of bodies, i.e. elected representatives, to equally, fairly, and effectively represent every citizen in the case of STV and most citizens in the case of MMP.
Under First-Past-the-Post, most Canadians do not have a representative whom they voted for and who can, as I say, fairly, equally, and effectively represent them. Most Canadians are not represented in the House of Commons by someone advocating for their interests.
As for a preferential system, it does not correct any of the problems associated with FPtP, despite the impression of it some people have.
Health Care : His push towards privatization ( without actually saying that was the direction) came at the cost of the collapse of the Public Systems,.Long wait times ( not COVID Induced), closed Emergency Departments, shortage of both Nurses , Physicians and Allied Health Professionals.. The Health Care System unraveling was closely followed by the blundering changes to the Education System. A system where Private and Public is achievable, but not at the cost to Public too the extent they have taken it. Nor at the cost of ramming it through and turning a deaf ear to Parents ( Voters) as has been the case in Education!
Canadians and Albertans live beyond their means when it comes to health and education. Not even wealthy Norway can afford to give free universal hospital stays like Canada does.
But then every marketer in Canada knows Canadians will put up with a lot of mediocrity as long as they don't have to open their tight wallets.
We pay an enormous amount for that healthcare system just as we do for everything else that is “free” in Canada. This thought process and the fact that the majority of our wages are taken by Governments, so you can have “free” stuff while telling us our pocket books are tight, is why we are in the situation we are right now. Canadians pay dearly for this service that bureaucrat's suck the majority of money out for their grand life styles. Then raise our taxes to add a few more dollars to their paychecks!
Right, because the voters should never be blamed for the decisions they support. It's always someone else's fault, this time it's the faceless bureaucrats.
From A to Z his government lacked any common sense. They couldn't even get the referendum on DST question right. If you think about it he had no leadership experience prior to this gig, he was always Harpers follower.
Well written & thoughtful article. Eastern Canada seems to change parties every 2 terms or so with the idea that a government too long in power becomes complacent and stops listening.
Comment of Mr. Kenny in the last election that Alberta was “ naturally Conservative” did sound both complacent and arrogant.
That would explain why the Liberals were in power in Ontario for so long. Perhaps, Not telling the truth to the people is what kept them in. I find that it’s not easy to get around Conservatives with stories as they recognize and demand better when told mistruths by those in power. No one, knowingly or not, likes to be sold a bogus story. Perhaps that is why Conservatives dislike the media as well.
Yet another superb piece, Jen! There’s something Nixonian about Kenney’s fall in the way that, more often than not, his (mostly unnecessary) machinations blew up in his face. It suspect he enjoyed the skullduggery for its own sake
This is a great line: "Further, Alberta isn't a particularly ideologically conservative place. This is a point I keep on trying to make to no avail to partisans."
I think that's true for most of Canada and moreover, it's true across the ideological specrtum. Most Canadians don't really care about political ideology. We're a fairly pragmatic people who seem to want stability, prosperity and for things to work -- peace, order and good government.
We're not getting as much of that as we probably want lately, which seems to motivate politicians to go harder on ideology. But, what matters -- what we actually care about -- is governments who deliver the stuff that actually touches our lives. A LOT of that is actually on how well the government and the public service can work together. But, ideologues (on both sides) tend to like to spout easy-sounding, difficult-to-deliver solutions that ulimately fail.
Of course, most public policy challenges that matter to people are actually complex and not easy to solve. Inflation, deficits, climate change, pandemic response, productivity -- all require pretty difficult trade-offs and defy easy solutions. Anybody that promises easy solutions is probably not being entirely honest!
Andrew Potter's co-author Joe Heath did his own whole book on it in 2001:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Efficient_Society
...that Canada in general is not that ideological, or rather, we just want efficiency; we'll sacrifice our weak ideological commitment if it gets results.
Michael Adams of Environics has documented how a single, dramatic measure of authoritarian attitudes ("Father of the family must be master in his own house", yes/no?) varies only modestly across Canada, but very sharply in the US.
https://www.environicsinstitute.org/michael-adams/books/fire-ice
Those are both pertinent and excellently-reasoned references
An excellent piece of analysis. Gerson is a fine writer, always look forward to her material. As to Kenney - or O'Toole for that matter - always important to remember that trying to keep everyone happy is almost always a mistake. He should have had the backbone to stand up to the most divisive members of his caucus and let the chips fall where they may. As it is, I don't know who in their right mind would want to lead the federal or Alberta Conservative parties, as long as they seem bent on purging each other.
"What's the value in being an ideological conservative if your dogma doesn't produce the results you promise to the electorate?"
Yeah, exactly.
Maybe THE fundamental problem with Conservatives in Canada is their fixation on being "Conservative". When you do that, you are automatically creating a divide, a sort of club you have to join to be one of the cool kids. You're in a bubble that effectively contains your group and acts as resistance against others coming in.
People don't necessarily want to join your college campus club of nerd-Cons. They just want competency, good judgement, and hopefully some minimum of integrity.
Politics is like economics: if its in the news, you're doing it wrong.
Stephen Harper didn't become Prime Minister by slamming one of Friedrich Hayek's books on a table and saying "this is what we believe" the way Margaret Thatcher did. He did it partially because the federal Liberals were burned out, but more because his campaign had clear, focused messaging on a few key platform details that were easy for voters to understand and projected an image of calm, responsible competence. When people were anxious and worried during the 2008 recession, that same image of competence helped Harper win again, and eventually gain a majority in 2011.
Libs, like Cons before them, are benefiting from a rudderless opposition.
I remember Harper's original messaging in 2006: 5 (or 6, can't remember) major promises, relatively clearly defined. It was effective.
Unfortunately, he didn't realize what Americans already know: after about 8 or so years of government, even your supporters are starting to get tired of you. His refusal to anoint a successor is partly responsible for the Trudeau years. We could have been talking about PM Ambrose by now
Agreed. Lack of succession planning was Harper's greatest failure. Instead Canada suffers from a C list celebrity who plays PM on social media.
That's a brilliant assessment.
That's one very broad definition of "broadly in line" death rate. It was double that of BC next door.
The gross numbers only appear to be 50% higher (4452/3447 but for 15% less population than BC), but it's really double, because BC has so many more old people, like myself and 3 friends who spent our young, productive, high-tax years in AB, then promptly moved to BC to inflict our aging bodies on its health-care system. When I went through the number of people over 70 in each province, the death rate in Alberta is really double that of BC.
http://brander.ca/c19#jasonbutcher
(The attached horrid graphic is intended to be funny. Honest.)
I don't actually blame JK for that death rate, "worst summer" and all. Alberta is *obviously* a different ideology, as shown by their lower vaccination rate, despite the government never dissing that, always encouraging it. The difference between urban and rural vaccination rates is an even clearer marker that it is cultural, not government-driven.
Jason's "open soon" attitudes and programs didn't help, but they were a symptom of the pressures he was under, not the root cause of the problem. People in Alberta took the pandemic less seriously, distanced less, restricted contacts less. Similar stories across the 3 prairie provinces, again, contrast the rural vaccination and death rates.
Forgot to admit: the above is irrelevant to Jen's political-electability topic. "Pandemic performance" is sadly unconnected to political popularity. Nobody bumped off more Canadians that Legault. By far. Quebec's death rate is double Alberta's, double Canada's, i.e. nearly 3 times the "Rest of Canada's". And nobody is more-certain of reelection. I will never understand Quebec.
No one does....:)
BC counted their COVID deaths differently. Check out their overall death rate as well as the number of fentanyl related deaths.
BC radically changed the death-rate definition several weeks back and the stats are now worthless; but up to that point, they were quite comparable, both based on deaths "of" COVID, not "with".
With respect, if you don't provide links and details with a comment like that, you're denigrating the data provided without really providing a reason, much less a correction.
I was just trying to point out that BC can't be included when it comes to understanding COVID data and how the provinces compare.
I don't believe that's the case, but would welcome a correction, if you can provide data.
A good overview of why Kenney rose and fell - much better than the 'he was a true conservative who was pushed out by a bunch of kooks' narrative that others are pushing. I don't think Alberta is ungovernable. I don't even think the UCP is unmanageable - though that is clearly the harder task. It does require an ability to be open and form a consensus from the variety of tribes that live under the broad 'conservative tent' in Alberta. Ralph Klein did it. So did Peter Lougheed (though the composition of the 'conservative tribes under the tent' was quite different back then). Unfortunately, it only took a couple of months into Kenney's Premiership to see that his idea of consensus-building was that he would be the coachman, hold the reins and crack the whip while everyone else could get in harness and pull. That was never going to work for long, COVID or no COVID.
There's surely an irony that the leader most like Klein since he left office is Rachel Notley (though I doubt she's appreciate the comparison). Not only does she relate well to 'severely normal Albertans' but her political skills in holding together her own centre-left coalition AND making it look easy are very Klein-like. It's not often as discussed, but the centre-left in Alberta is easily as disjointed as the centre-right. Yet she's united those tribes and has held them together through four years of government and three years of opposition with nary a peep of dissent. If I could offer one piece of advice to any would-be conservative leader looking to 'unite' the UCP, I would say, "Look across the aisle for an example of both the qualities needed and how to do it."
The big difference is that the NDP caucus is mostly comprised of people in way over their heads who will never hold even remotely comparable jobs. They go along with the leader because they have virtually no skills or confidence to do anything other than follow.
Part of the problem with welcoming libertarians into the tent, and I say this as a libertarian, is that they tend to be independent minded, contrarian and outspoken. Kenney gave these people far to much leeway.
I suspect one of Kenney’s problems is that there’s a growing, near irreconcilable gulf between urban and rural Albertans. Political power and population used to be fairly evenly split between the groups back in the glory days of Peter Lougheed, but was significantly tilting towards cities by the time Klein came to power. The rural caucus is disproportionately strong in the UCP, but can’t carry the province.
Back to topic (sorry; pandemic stats are a fussbudget trigger).
No analyst should try to get around what Kenney could not: the Kook Factor. At least Jason, as he went down in flames, called them out with the K word.
It's so very hard for me to believe that smart people could possibly have believed in the "War Room" narrative; they had to have been cynical politicians selling a Tale. It was a conspiracy theory, furcrissakes. A conspiracy, presumably with American oil behind it (cui bono?), to use green protests as a cover for landlocking our oil, to improve their sales. That most of the "green movement" were really dupes, funded by foreign frackers. That was the nub of it.
It was easily debunked, before the War Room even started up business, and never made a serious defense of the conspiracy theory. It may be the first time millions in public funds have been spent to chase and promote a conspiracy theory, at least since the Red Scares.
I really think that Kenney and his staff had to sit around at some point, figuring out how to placate and inspire the Kooks with a gesture, like building a wall to keep out nonexistent Caravans, a giant virtue signal.
American Republicans had to walk that tightrope for 35 years, since White Evangelicals flipped to Republican to vote for Reagan. They had to throw them bones, gestures, (always cultural, never economic) on topics like race, women, gays and immigrants. But now, the Republicans have fallen off that tightrope, and their party got eaten by those they'd pandered to.
Jason was still pandering, with a theatrical re-opening in the face of full ICUs, in mid-February, I think he hoped that would break the Coutts blockade. They sneered at the gesture.
I don't think the UCP can pander any longer; they've got to draw a clear divide, as the feds did when Bernier had to go off with his few percent. Whether that costs an election or two, is just too bad; you can't build a party on conspiracy theories and denial. It won't last.
Why then is Canada the only country that can not get pipelines built? US and every other country has put them in a dime a dozen. Go take a look at how many US pipeline miles there are and then take a look at Canada’s. Please explain perhaps why only Canada has an environmental movement that stops all building of pipelines? Where does the money come from to allow them such a wide reach as it’s country wide? Perhaps you can explain such a phenomenon? I know that one day every single Canadian will regret their lack of knowledge or care for the one industry that is the very reason we are still here, living, and working as without it we shall not live long. No solar and wind will never sustain life on earth as we know it, not with the amount of people on it. Depopulation of a grand style, such a pandemic, may aid in culling the weak but it will take more than one. Perhaps a war will aid in depopulating enough to make the numbers work and perhaps euthanasia laws. Everything helps but it would have to be made much broader than that as people in poorer countries continue to have children. Starving them with a pandemic, war, and no supply chain, is most likely helpful but there would still be a significant population that survive mass starvation. I am sure with the politicians of the day and their deep affiliation to power, wealth, they will come up with some brilliant solutions to depopulate earth further. They are doing well so far but a little more ingenuity is necessary in order to allow them to make their choice a viable alternative. Just stopping use of all fossil fuels will deplete the people down to a reasonable amount so I am sure that will be next. You’ll have to get back to me on that, along with why only Canada can not build pipelines.
It’s the utter stagnation of thought that will kill off man kind and their belief that truth comes from the government and media. Perhaps that is what is necessary to depopulate the world enough for the political elites to build back better.
I'll confess, I didn't read your entire post. But, to answer your original question -- Canada can get pipelines built. We're building one right now to the west coast on the taxpayer's dime, if I'm not mistaken!
It is hard to get jusisdiction-spanning infrastructure built, for sure. Certainly, the uncertainly around Indigenous land claims and a real need to address their concerns in areas covered by treaties is a complication, but it's necessary. Crossing provincial boundaries is also challenging, but a lot of that is baked into the fabric of Confederation.
A bigger challenge is that pipelines are really expensive and projects are sensitive to swings in commodity prices. The reason you and I are paying for a pipeline is because the process of getting a pipeline signed off is long and complicated and the market for oil softened during that process. The company looked at the risks, potential returns and other opportunities and bailed on the project. The government hope is that building it will de-risk the project and we'll get our money back; the history of the privatization of these projects leaves me very skeptical! We'll see.
The notion that this is a uniquely Canadian challenge also doesn't past the smell test. Keystone XL was cancelled by the US, not us. And, there is an ongoing legal battle with Michigan to try to keep open an existing pipeline that supplies a lot of eastern Canada with western Canadian petroleum (Line 5) due to environmental concerns in that state.
So ... pipelines are risky, difficult and expensive to build and there's lots of good, difficult-to-change reasons for that ... In Canada and elsewhere. Well, I imagine building pipelines in China is much, much easier, but there are other challenges there ;-).
We have no federation. Nor can you call this a country. We can not get anything done because they don't want to get it done. Period. You know that as well as I. Where there is will, there is a way but because this federation no longer exists, there is none.
They have destroyed our once celebrated Constitution and our Charter. They are no longer sacred, they have ceased to exist under the Governments today. It will never be again what it was, nor what we had hoped for. Canada is dead and it can not be retrieved from the ashes, regardless of what you believe. You mistake ideals for truth and they are not the same. Not at all.
TMX is not done nor will it be under the Trudeau Regime. Our supply of COVID vaccines was done at a massive cost to every Canadian and the forced vaccination continues due to the nine vaccines the Government bought for every Canadian and the trial Trudeau has us under for digital ID in Canada along with facial recognition for every Canadian. Pharma care already exists in Canada and always has. Its done Provincially so they continue to waste Canadian's tax dollars on things we don't need, like Pharma care and Daycare, instead of our Health system which is a mess along with the country, personal debt, and the countries debt, not to mention the unaffordability to live. Brilliant to bring in unnecessary programs to financially burdened a Federation, country, Post National State or what ever you care to call this large form of land we live on. Mark my words. Government can not run a one car parade and people want them to run their lives. That's frightening as is the direction this place is headed. I suggest folks buy something that has worth other than money like gold or land as we are headed for disaster. That will be the legacy of this regime in Ottawa.
As documented by the National Observer:
https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/philanthropies-pledge-4-billion-to-combat-climate-change
...if Alberta's environmental groups got $40M, then it was just 1% of that one environmentalist fund; we were not even a high priority. Your conspiracists have names like Hewlett, Rockefeller, and Bloomberg.
The National Observer? Really? Like there are no ideological reasons or twists to their stories or any other environmental news organization? So you believe the rhetoric from their biased news but not facts and figures from the other side. You don't think they might be attempting to save their own bacon and will take their word as gospel? Really? Yet Conservative are biased. lol
The link is not to the NO, but to the announcement of the actual $4B environmental philanthropy funds, which really exist. It doesn't matter if your attention is drawn to a fact by Donald Trump or Karl Marx; it's still a fact.
And the fact is, anti-oilsands funding is easily explained by the many environmental lobby donors that have existed for many years; no sneaky American oil companies required.
It was an unusually DUMB conspiracy theory, in that most of them are impossible to falsify. (Prove there are no aliens.) This one was easily debunked.
The theory originally came from Glenn Beck so Kenney spent $3.5 million of Albertan's money to conclude that Beck is unreliable. That's some fiscal responsibility!
Your theory is not a theory at all. Nor did it come from Glen Beck. The Person who investigated and reported on these facts was Vivian Krause. She was a once activists that found this information while digging into financial dealings to stop the Salmon Farms in BC.
https://www.sasktoday.ca/south/local-news/anti-pipeline-campaign-was-planned-intended-and-foreign-funded-vivian-krause-4134724
https://fairquestions.typepad.com/rethink_campaigns/tar-sands-campaign-400-payments.html
https://financialpost.com/opinion/vivian-krause-rachel-notley-the-rockefellers-and-albertas-landlocked-oil
Facts do matter. Of course the Activists, Government, mainstream media and all involved would debunk anything resembling truth or tell everyone its just another Conspiracy theory. Yes and the people they continue to believe in the Government of Canada being thier saviour when in deed they, the activists, elites, and those "who"decide your freedom is no longer in the best interests of the planet and demand compliance above all.
Yes and that is exactly what the report says. The Rockefellers were oil producers for a very long time and their wealth and influence is known by all. Just as Justin Trudeau's grandfather and the wealth of his family was made from oil. Funny how those who are wealthy because of it demonize it, and attempt to destroy it. Its like the idea that the bank of Canada is owned by the Rothchild's but the bank is deemed, independent. These are not conspiracy theories sir, they are facts.
I guess the Rockefellers, who divested from oil six years ago, have a plan to get back into oil after the Canadian oil industry has been destroyed by their environmentalist puppets. Alas, the Canadian oil industry exported more in 2019 than any in history, just like several years before that, as we've done nothing but grow production until the pandemic.
https://thenarwhal.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Slide22-627x470.jpg
I can't imagine why anybody would bother to complain about such an utterly unsuccessful conspiracy. It's like hearing that there was actually a conspiracy to badmouth Vancouver as a filming location, all around Hollywood, try to get filming back to California. Why get angry? They failed.
They are not conspiracy theories they are actually proven facts. Of course you would never take the time to read the report because you deemed it a conspiracy theory before it even came out. That is the fault of the biased media. These are facts, not conspiracies with actual proof. If your completely led by the biased media your a part of the problem. You don’t get Jane Fonda coming to The Oilsands to make nice and you do know she is tight with the Rockefeller's. Close personal friend actually but why allow facts to distort what the Liberal/NDP Coalition regime and its paid for media say. Instead they must stop all misinformation on the internet. Like China playing with a virus with funding from Eco Science and it accidentally escapes the lab in Wuhan is a Conspiracy Theory too. Stop that Misinformation! Lol
oh but CBC and the lamestream news , paid for by the Trudeau regime, are a beacon of truth. Stop getting your news from the Toronto Star.
Because Canada is the only democratic country whose media is so monolithic that the managerial technocrats can actually succeed at labelling everyone who disagrees with them "kooks" and keeping them down. It might have something to do with the fact that our entire media apparatus is state funded.
Correct on that but it’s being going on much longer than the media has been corrupt. Lol
Great read, Jen!
Kenney could have been Canada's Ron DeSantis, who was proven categorically right about Covid - same mortality record as comparable states, far better performance on human rights and the economy.
DeSantis showed courage, and is now a very popular governor and presidential contender. Kenney lost his nerve, and now he has lost his job.
Hmmmm....Florida has 2/3 the population of Canada and almost double the number of Covid deaths. If you like psychopaths then De Santis is your guy!
I literally said "comparable states".🙄🙄 Try California.
Ok, quick Google check....California 230 deaths per 100k people...Florida 346/100k.
Ron Death Sentence wins! Florida is pretty much the middle of the pack for US states, though.
Terrific article. This is just what I subscribe to The Line for! A few points:
-Ms. Gerson's best point is that we're not even that ideologically conservative. Our politicians have been saying and doing things for decades that would have ruined their careers in the American Bible Belt on everything from gay marriage to public healthcare to abortion, and they've suffered little to no political consequences. If anything, it's moving towards social conservatism that'll kill you, even in Alberta.
-In their letter explaining why they decided not to go ahead with their mine, Teck Resources explicitly said that one of the major reasons was because Alberta nixed its carbon tax. I can almost see Preston Manning facepalming in frustration while muttering "I told you so" under his breath, particularly when raging socialists like Jack Mintz have also come out in favour of carbon taxes. Manning has been trying for years to get his fellow conservatives to be more assertive on the environment, and Teck Resources arguably vindicated him.
-The funny thing about equalization that Kenney probably hoped we'd all forget is that it was his government, led by Stephen Harper, that established the current equalization formula. I agree that equalization needs an overhaul, but Kenney was basically demanding that Trudeau clean up the mess he and Harper made in the first place.
-As much as right-wing partisans might have hated Rachel Notley, her stances on resource development kind of made her a black sheep in NDP circles in the rest of Canada. And she actually left resource rates the way they were, while Peter Lougheed was the one who actually raised them back in the day.
-I wonder if, instead of the decades-long periods of one political party being the only viable one in Alberta, we'll become like the other Western provinces with the NDP and a conservative party constantly rotating in and out of government and swapping sides in the legislature. Having multiple competitive parties can only help our democracy. Even if you prefer having a conservative party in office, a progressive opposition will keep it on its toes and force it to remain competitive.
Thoughtful, constructive suggestions—thanks!
What makes Alberta seem ungovernable and, for that matter, even Canada, is not its citizens. The issue is the First-Past-the-Post electoral system. FPtP, perversely, rewards politicians who traffic in divisiveness and discord.
If Alberta and Canada, for that matter, adopted one of the proportional representation election systems recommended by citizens assemblies, mixed member proportional or single transferable votes, the perverse incentives that seem to make Alberta ungovernable would mostly vanish.
The problem is not Alberta nor Albertans nor politicians nor political parties, it's the FPtP electoral system.
Alberta is not unique. FPtP degrades politics everywhere that it is in use.
I'm not quite sure that's true. There are places with proportional systems that still struggle with establishing stable governments. Israel was a good example of that for a while. I believe Belgium is another one.
Thanks for your response, Javed.
You'll notice that I was specific about the type of proportional representation I was suggesting: mixed member proportional and single transferable vote. Neither Belgium nor Israel uses either of these systems.
Moreover, you might take note that during all the time Israel and Belgium's politicians struggled to "form a government," their respective countries functioned just fine.
Legislators and legislatures don't run the government. Concerns about stable legislatures ought not be confused with well-functioning government. Since 2019, Canada has not had a "stable" government under First-Past-the-Post. It has had a minority government, nonetheless the government was perfectly able to provide all the goods, services, and benefits Canadians expect and to which Canadians are entitled, despite all the high drama in the legislature.
Despite the conflation of words, 'government' and 'legislature' are quite different things. A well-functioning government in an advanced democracies like Canada, Belgium, and Israel don't depend on a stable legislatures.
Proportional rep sounds perfect but it’s actually impossible to govern effectively when you have too many bodies at the table, each insisting on their own favourite dish being served. Add to that the astounding methods used in most places that are, in effect, undemocratic.
PR is a recipe for unstable governance. If you want a better way to elect our governments, then a preferential system is a middle way. To those who will point at Australia where there is a push to replace the current Preferential system, you need to be aware that that country is actually in turmoil, for a whole lot of reasons. I wonder if that’s the real reason for the debate. Heaven knows, Scott-from-marketing is a dab hand at the look-the-other-way ruse.
Hello, Patricia.
Your claim that "PR is a recipe for unstable governance" is not valid. You're confusing the notion of an unstable legislature, like the one we've had in Canada since 2019 with unstable government. Legislatures and governments are very different things. Canada, it's worth mentioning, managed the COVID-19 very well compared to other countries despite an unstable 'minority government.'
Moreover, in countries that use the PR systems I mentioned in my comment and that were recommended for Canada by citizens' assemblies--Single Transferable Vote and Mixed Member Proportional--there are not 'too many bodies at the table, each insisting on their own favourite dish being served.'
There are the right number of bodies, i.e. elected representatives, to equally, fairly, and effectively represent every citizen in the case of STV and most citizens in the case of MMP.
Under First-Past-the-Post, most Canadians do not have a representative whom they voted for and who can, as I say, fairly, equally, and effectively represent them. Most Canadians are not represented in the House of Commons by someone advocating for their interests.
As for a preferential system, it does not correct any of the problems associated with FPtP, despite the impression of it some people have.
Health Care : His push towards privatization ( without actually saying that was the direction) came at the cost of the collapse of the Public Systems,.Long wait times ( not COVID Induced), closed Emergency Departments, shortage of both Nurses , Physicians and Allied Health Professionals.. The Health Care System unraveling was closely followed by the blundering changes to the Education System. A system where Private and Public is achievable, but not at the cost to Public too the extent they have taken it. Nor at the cost of ramming it through and turning a deaf ear to Parents ( Voters) as has been the case in Education!
Yet Alberta has more or less the same health care policies as do other provinces, and the highest per capita spend.
Canadians and Albertans live beyond their means when it comes to health and education. Not even wealthy Norway can afford to give free universal hospital stays like Canada does.
But then every marketer in Canada knows Canadians will put up with a lot of mediocrity as long as they don't have to open their tight wallets.
We pay an enormous amount for that healthcare system just as we do for everything else that is “free” in Canada. This thought process and the fact that the majority of our wages are taken by Governments, so you can have “free” stuff while telling us our pocket books are tight, is why we are in the situation we are right now. Canadians pay dearly for this service that bureaucrat's suck the majority of money out for their grand life styles. Then raise our taxes to add a few more dollars to their paychecks!
Right, because the voters should never be blamed for the decisions they support. It's always someone else's fault, this time it's the faceless bureaucrats.
From A to Z his government lacked any common sense. They couldn't even get the referendum on DST question right. If you think about it he had no leadership experience prior to this gig, he was always Harpers follower.
Well written & thoughtful article. Eastern Canada seems to change parties every 2 terms or so with the idea that a government too long in power becomes complacent and stops listening.
Comment of Mr. Kenny in the last election that Alberta was “ naturally Conservative” did sound both complacent and arrogant.
That would explain why the Liberals were in power in Ontario for so long. Perhaps, Not telling the truth to the people is what kept them in. I find that it’s not easy to get around Conservatives with stories as they recognize and demand better when told mistruths by those in power. No one, knowingly or not, likes to be sold a bogus story. Perhaps that is why Conservatives dislike the media as well.
Yet another superb piece, Jen! There’s something Nixonian about Kenney’s fall in the way that, more often than not, his (mostly unnecessary) machinations blew up in his face. It suspect he enjoyed the skullduggery for its own sake
Excellent sum-up of Kenney's sojourn in Alberta.
It looks like Kenney once again used a shock tactic to send us all off in the wrong direction.
Now we see nothing's changed, Kenney's still in charge ... and rumour has it that he'll run in the leadership race and probably win!
And here it is Victoria Day long weekend ... UCP's favorite time to slide nasty stuff through while we're all camping and barbecuing!