Conservatism good, liberalism bad… OK?

The acidic adult orientated cartoon South Park has an uber-geek teacher character name Mr. Mackey. He stands in front of his disrespectful class and with a nasally voice spouts snippets of wisdom like, “Sex is bad… OK” and “Drugs are bad…OK.” All the while his class pick their noses, and complain that they never learn anything. Like many social satire, his character is very much true to real life. He is seen as the educated trying to install wisdom in the uneducated.

Pop culture references aside, last week, real life imitated social satire when our prime minister Stephan Harper delivered a speech at a fundraising dinner when he suggested that the current financial crisis was the result of Wall Street greed and liberal lending policies. He is quoted as saying, “Regulators may have failed to prevent it, but in the end, it was a failure of the private sector to live according to the values we as conservatives know to be true.”

‘Conservatism good, liberalism bad…OK?’ … and the masses stared picking their noses.

Harpers comments cut like a knife to many who embrace a liberal philosophy. He rightfully equated a person who lives beyond their means, which includes entities at a corporate level as being liberally irresponsible. Businesses who adopt a conservative approach to budgeting and spending do not find themselves in as deep a trough during trying times. We are seeing many large businesses who have been running under a loose financial control with their hands out, and many of these corporations are from Wall Street.

Take the recent slap-in-the-face delivered by the Wall Street bigwigs of AIG who required a $170 billion dollar bail-out from the American people, only to turn around and issue $165 million dollars in bonuses to the very people who’s liberal businesses moxie put American International Group on the brink of financial ruin. Could this be an example of a private sector business not living in accordance to the values of conservatism?

Harper definitely has a way of poking at the left-wing ‘open-minded’ folk. He does so by just speaking his mind. Right-is-right and left-is wrong, right?

He reminds me of another prime minister that held power during similar circumstances. Former prime minister, Richard B. Bennet held power from 1930 to 1935 during the worst years of the Great Depression. Like many a leader who governs during bad times, he came under great criticism.

Being a Conservative and taking the power from William Lyon Mackenzie King did not help with his popularity. But Bennet was another man who spoke his mind, and had the unfortunate position of governing Canada at the beginning of a financial crisis. Bennet, although historically stingy with the public purse during a time many hands were held out, has been treated better by history than the folks affected by his policies. He created the Bank of Canada, an institution that is credited with providing Canada with the 17th best ranked banking system in the world. His reforms created the minimum wage system, unemployment insurance and he is credited with creating the CBC! Ok, three out of four is not all that bad, however, Bennet was a man who practiced a true form conservatism.

In contrast, there is Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Unlike Bennet, he took power during times of prosperity. A true Liberal, he was responsible for establishing the Liberal party as the ‘natural governing party’. Although he is credited with repatriating the constitution and creating the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, he is considered by history as being a poor leader when it came to the economy. At the hands of this Liberal, Canada saw soaring unemployment, and inflation during the 70’s and 80’s. This became known as a condition of economic ‘stagflation’. He is also the culprit that imposed the "National Energy Program," a policy that alienated the West and drew massive funds from Alberta to the eastern provinces. In the end, his liberal guidance left Canada with a massive deficit. Unlike Bennet, Trudeau was a man that defined true liberalism.

But Harper now finds his government holding the reigns of a country that has seen record layoffs over the past 3 months. Alberta saw 5,700 people lose their jobs in February alone, giving Alberta an unemployment rate of 4.4%. Harper is governing at a time where Canada’s energy, construction, auto and print media industries are experiencing economic stressors that are seeing business closures and bottom line shrinkage.

Even though Canada is positioned to deal with this financial crisis better than most other nations, we are being dragged down by forces outside our borders. Our conservative government is being blamed for the financial instability of many businesses in the private sector.

In a time of financial crisis, business policies holding to the value of conservatism is needed for not only the government, but the private sector as well. History will judge whether Harper’s actions helped Canada through the recession. Paul Thomas, a professor of the University of Manitoba said it best, “In our system of government, with power so concentrated in the hands of the prime minister and cabinet, it’s pretty hard to evade the ultimate blame.”

So as Harper stands before the nation and tells us that “Conservatism is good.. OK?” let us hope that the classroom hearing the lesson and not gawking with a blank stare listening to ipods, or twittering as the answers to the final examination is being handed out.

Get out of bed early and make it happen!

“I love the United States, and I fully intend to become a United States citizen. I like the wide open attitude of Americans. Americans generally praise success. They admire people who get out of bed early and make it happen!”

Peter Pocklington

In 2002 Peter ‘Puck’ divested himself of all his holdings in Canada and moved to the good-old U.S. of A. Since then, he has expressed his love for his newly adopted country and as of 2007 was seeking permanent citizenship.

Yes, Peter wants to live and stay in America. I would suggest that he may have reasons not to return to Canada, but to speculate on those reasons would probably be unfair.

But Peter loves America and they admire folks that get out of bed early and make it happen! It appears that Peter considers himself an early riser and one that should be admired by all for his tenacity, business moxie, clever divesting and, of course, fraudulent conveyance.

As a matter of fact, it was some pretty good early risers that took Peter at his word when on March 11, while Peter was still in bed, early rising FBI agents broke down his doors and said, “You just get dressed and you come with us.”

As a Canadian I generally praise success and I admire FBI dudes that make things happen. But when it comes to Peter ‘Puck’ he has, over the many years, garnished some admirers in the ‘sports business.’ He has also made a few enemies. Take the average Gainers Meat Packing Plant employee, or maybe many an Edmonton Oilers fans to name a few thousand. Or how about the fella that broke into his Edmonton home in 1982, held his family hostage in a bungled kidnapping bid, only to be apprehended by Edmonton’s finest. Odd that the only person injured by the police that day was Peter himself. HMMMM, makes ya think! I wonder if that policeman moved to the U.S. and joined the FBI.

To his credit, he has made a few good friends, the obvious one is Glen Sather, who put up one of his homes as collateral and paid the million dollar bail set by the judge. ‘Slats,’ I hope the ankle bracelets on Peter are tight. Talk about the high cost of friendship.

Peter is facing a two-count indictment, which accuses him of making false statements in bankruptcy and making false oaths and accounts in bankruptcy. In other words, he hid assets so that after he is free and clear of his debts, he can then keep living a comfortable life. Maybe even divest himself of the hidden assets and move to France and start over. In a few years he may be able to say that he ‘loves the French folks, they admire people that get up in the afternoon and have others get stuff done.’

When is comes to Peter ‘Puck’ the average Albertan has many questions regarding money issues. From Treasury Branch loans, to the dynasty drain when he divested the Edmonton Oilers of it’s dream team.

It does not take a genius to really know what Peter ‘Puck’ is all about. He is an open book when it comes to his motivations, admirations and misdirection’s. Take a look at what has become known as ‘Peter Pocklington’s Laws of Business.’ These laws are framed and prominently displayed on the walls of his corporate offices. They include, “When given a choice, take both!”, “Do it by the book…but be the author!”, “When forced to compromise, ask for more!”, “If you can’t beat them, join them…then beat them!”, “If you can’t win, change the rules!”, “If you can’t change the rules, ignore them!” and “Bureaucracy is a challenge to be conquered with a righteous attitude, a tolerance for stupidity and a bulldozer when necessary!”

“Well Peter, as an Alberta tax payer and a fan of the Edmonton Oilers, I am really going to miss you. Those Americans you love so much have a way of flexing their penal muscle that lands a many bad boy in jail for not just 6 months, 12 months or even two years less a day. No Peter, it looks like you just may be playing chess with Bubba for 10 years. I like your last Law of Business that I have yet to mention. You should have taken your own advice when you said, “The faster you move, the slower time paces, the longer you live!” If only you had heeded your own words.”

Yes, we all would love to be a fly on the wall of Peter’s cell when he faces 10 years in jail. I would like to hear the conversation he will have with the likes of Bernard Madoff, the fella that made off with 55 billion dollars. Now wouldn’t that be an interesting ‘Joint Venture.’

Properly Motivated but Misguided

In the community of Fort Chipewyan some 915 people live off the shore of one of Canada’s largest lakes. It is also a location that has been identified as being a possible “cancer cluster,” a place where higher than average reported cases of cancer exists. Fort Chipewyan is located 650 km north of Nisku as the crow flies. Between 2001-2007, a Dr. John O'Connor, who was Ft. Chip’s only resident physician, raised the awareness to Alberta Health that the community had higher levels of cancer than other locations in Alberta. Now two years and one Oscar nominated documentary later, the cancer is being blamed on the Ft. McMurray oil sands operations, which lay 236 kms. south of Ft. Chip. No study or evidence yet exists that connects Alberta Oil Sands to the plight of this community, but with the lack of other suspects, the oil industry is yet again found guilty.

In an effort to damage the oil sands operation, the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nations along with the Mikisew Cree First Nations, have purchased a full-page advertisement in one of USA’s largest publications, USA Today. The advertisement, written as if it came from an American group starts out, “President Obama, you’ll never guess who’s standing between us and our new energy economy…Canada’s Tar Sands: The dirtiest Oil on Earth.” The words are above a map of North America with Canada shown as a spilling oil blotch spreading across the borders onto US soil and spilling into the oceans. The Advert states that the oil sands in Alberta are spewing masses of greenhouse gas and toxic chemicals and poisoning water, forest and neighbouring First Nation communities. USA Today has the largest coast-to-coast circulation in America. Costly adverting, but very effective.

The only question is, what effect the Advert will have on the Ft. Chip community and their health issues? Even if it has the desired negative effect on Alberta oil industry, will those results benefit the First Nation community? It can be argued that it may even have a negative effect on that community proving that their passionate plea from a foreign dignitary was properly motivated but misguided. It is not a great mental leap to believe that any form of industry could pose a health risk of any community. Case in point is the number of breathing disorders reported by people who live in or near Ft. Saskatchewan, a community nested close to a cluster of chemical plants. But, it is interesting that a similar cancer ratio has not been recorded in Ft. McMurray, which is a great deal closer to the oil sands operation than Ft. Chip. In light of the negative coverage that this industry has had from the left-wing press, the label ‘carcinogenic’ from a community 236 kilometres away seems not too great a leap.

This misguided move is very similar to the efforts of the northern British Columbian First Nation groups used to advance their land claims. The result there was to drive away investment in the area, which in turn hurt the group and the province. It is very much like using a sledgehammer to hang a picture.

The USA Today Advert may very well be the straw that broke the camels back. With a democrat in the White House, the hysteria of global warming and the world in economic turmoil, the efforts of the Fort Chipewyan First Nations may have a rippling effect that will hurt them and other First Nations communities and our communities right here in Nisku and Leduc.

Alberta Oil Sands is a source of 62% of Alberta's total oil production and 47% of all oil produced in Canada. As of 2006, output of oil sands production was reported to be 1.126 million barrels per day. It was estimated that until the slow down on the industry output of oil would have reached 4.969 million barrels per day by 2030. That would make Canada the largest oil producing country in the world. The so-called dirty process of extracting the oil from the open-pit mining of the bitumen accounts for only 20% of the oil sands that are recovered. A new process called ‘SITU’ will result in 80% of the oil recovered. SITU is process where oil deep below the surface is drawn up and then pumped out using steam. It is found to be ‘cleaner’ and is very similar to conventional methods.

These economic realities and statistics are something that the Fort Chipewyan First Nations should be concerned about because other First Nations Bands have their eye on the oil sands for very different reasons. The oil sands operation falls within the boundaries of Treaty 8 signed in 1899 with the Fort McKay First Nation. Since then The Fort McKay First Nation has formed several companies to service the oil sands industry and will be developing a mine on their territory.

The actions of the Ft. Chip group is deliberately damaging both for the industry and the relations of Canada with the American people. One must wonder if other courses of action could have been taken to resolve health issues that may or may not have been caused by an industry that all Canadians depend on.

Standing his ground is what worries the left.

When it comes to Stephan Harper you either love the guy or despise him. For Canadians there is really no in-between. As an example, one left-wing blogger responding to a Globe and Mail article titled “ Ignatieff Vs. Harper” wrote, “I’ve had a belly-full of the Harper dictatorship and Iggy’s efforts to scuttle the Coalition. Every time we sing “O Canada,” we pledge to “stand on guard for thee.” Well, let’s start doing it! Let’s start taking back our democracy now!”

To many left wingers the descriptor ‘dictator’ when referring to Harper can be read in many respondents from national newspapers, radio shows and internet forums. Most of his detractors come from regions of Canada that typically vote to the left.

Here in Alberta, where the right-wing politicians enjoy continued support, the left-wing voter is out numbered, but their opinions do not change. So what is it about our current Prime Minister that irks the left?

First I believe that Mr. Harper is a conservative. Worse yet, he is a conservative that governs with his conscience. This is not to say he does not change his spots if circumstances dictate, quite the contrary. He has changed his position whenever it was politically expedient to do so. This is when the average left-winger pounces. They see this as hypocrisy because whether or not they want to admit it, Harper is held to a higher standard than Liberal leaders.

Second, Mr. Harper conducts business as if he has a majority government. Can you imagine, a leader of a country actually making unpopular decisions in spite at the risk of losing the ‘House’ confidence? It happened on two very recent occasions, first was the ‘funding of the arts’ decision that saw reduced government funding of the theatre and motion picture industry. An industry that is more prevalent in the east. Then there was the decision to end public funding of political parties. The former fuelled the anger of those who were incensed at the latter. The result was an attempted take-over by bipolar bed partners forming a coalition of the unwitting.

But whether Harper is your man or not, one thing is becoming clear as you peruse national news reports. Canada is beginning to look better politically from an international viewpoint.

Case in point; in 2006, Harper made an unpopular move to bolster our military. When he took office our military had a deteriorating inventory of heavy equipment. We had 30 Hercules aircraft, of which on average 20 would be grounded for repair at any given time. Our Sea King helicopters were in dire need of replacement and our ability to respond to incursions into the Northwest Passage were hindered by a lack of patrol boats, ice breakers and air response. In all, while the military has suffered since the Trudeau years, our military responsiveness has been reduced to 20,000 combat ready troops. This from a country that after WWII had the fourth largest military in the world.

In just two years our military has made progress and the USA has hinted they will accept Canada’s sovereign claim of the Northwest Passage if we can demonstrate sovereign control by our military.

Our conservative government has done just that. Defence Minister Peter MacKay has recently disclosed that just before Barack Obama’s Canadian visit last month CF-18 Hornet Jet Fighters intercepted two Russian TU-95 bombers just outside the Canadian Arctic and gave ‘clear signals’ to turn tail and head back to Russian air space. It was disclosed that our government has made a point of sending that same message to Russia each time they have encroached Canadian air space. These incursions from Russia started nearly two years ago, prior to that Canada did not detect any activity for decades.

When it comes to Canadian military, Harper has been clear on his position when he says, “I do not care whether the party opposite does not support our military. This party does, and we will have a strong military for a strong country.” This statement from a leader governing with a minority position. Right is right, the rebuilding of our military is only one of many important functions that needs to be addressed by our leadership.

Harpers, ’dictatorship’ style language of pushing ahead in spite of the risk of losing the confidence of the opposition is precisely what most right-wingers like. “He calls them as he sees them!”

This form of leadership is not lost on the likes of Michael Ignatieff. Looking more like a conservative in liberal clothing, Ignatieff is touring across Canada in an effort to wrestle support from conservative strongholds, the rural Canadian. If he is successful in winning the next federal election the progress for our military will once again be placed on the back burner. To do that, he will need the vote of the rural folks if he is going to get the support that Harper now enjoys.

In an effort to woo the farmer, Ignatieff has said he has family’s rural ties, insisting he loves the “smell of the farm.” I guess to the Liberal leader when he thinks of us non-urbanites he is reminded of the smell of a barn.

I think I will stick with Harper.