Posts Tagged ‘Wildrose’

Wildrose policy upgrade muddying their message? Hardly

- April 9th, 2013

Much has been made over the last couple of days over the Wildrose announcing it would be reviewing some policy stances in an attempt to appeal to more Albertans.

Commenters under our stories accuse them of being nothing more than Tories with another name, and the deputy premier ridiculed them as selling out their own values.

I get that a complete reversal, or removal of core values, would be seen as a betrayal of all the supporters who have been with a party since the beginning, but as I say in my column this week, there’s room for improvement. And if you think a losing party would keep going to voters with the exact same playbook election after election, you’re fooling yourself.

If the goal of your party is to win an election, you want a winning platform. But it has to be one that sticks with your core values. A complete killing of the Alberta Human Rights Commission may not have worked for the public, but let’s look at other reform. Or let’s do a better job of explaining the benefit of the original policy.

I have no issue with policy review. It’s natural to review policy.

What I take issue with is a party that says one thing during a campaign then does the opposite once elected. That’s unforgivable.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Categories: General | 3 comments

CTF debacle an example of poor Tory decision making

- March 6th, 2013

Which seems like a better PR strategy to you?

1. Let one of your opponents listen to your budget briefing, then let their comments get lost in the shuffle of opposition politicians and other groups. And do it under the guise of “we’re full.”

2. Refuse them entry for the first time in 20 years, deal with at least 24 hours of criticism over the decision, let someone else extend them the olive branch, then turn around and say a spot just opened up.

Sometimes it’s just best leave well enough alone.

That concept was lost on the Tories, who told officials with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation they would not be welcome at Thursday’s budget briefing.

Now, at the start of a legislature sitting, this would normally be a minor distraction, with a Speech from the Throne to get worked up over, and the normal sparring in question period.

But this isn’t a new session, with no new Throne Speech, no legislative agenda.

All the focus is on the budget and the Tories’ reputation as stewards of the public purse.

The CTF has long been critical of the PC government, so the ouster from the lockup is at best terrible optics and, at worst, it’s petty and punative.

Some would like to point out that left-wing labour groups have never been allowed into the budget lockup, so it’s only fair the right is getting its lumps.

Forget that other groups haven’t been allowed in, and forget that it’s an alleged “right-wing” distraction.

A group that routinely spars with the government, one that for 20 years got access to the budget lockup, was suddenly told “Sorry, no go.” If the left shoe were being kicked off, I’d find it baffling too.

The optics of it are terrible, especially in a contentious budget cycle where the specific group has been a thorn in the side of the government.

Then for the premier’s office to turn around and overrule the finance department, AFTER the official opposition had offered a way in for the CTF and three other groups. Two of those groups could be called left-wing, I might add.

So we go from “We’re full, so too bad,” to “We’re focused on the budget and welcome their continued input.”

Tags: , , , , ,
Categories: General | 2 comments

In this campaign, it’s all about the cash

- March 28th, 2012

It’s been official now for a couple of days, and unofficial for weeks.

Albertans are going to the polls April 23

And for all the talk of how different this race is, from the leaders to the parties to the political climate, at the end of the day, it’s about the dough.

And I’m not talking about all the talk of cutting budgets and balancing budgets, I’m talking about the Tories facing a well-financed an organized opponent.

I’m not saying the Wildrose will win because they have a lot of spending money, but much has been made of the party’s ability to fundraise more than their other opposition opponents.

And if the ad the party released in advance of the election call is any indication, the Wildrose is definitely something the Tories haven’t seen in a long, long time: A well-funded opponent.

Slick campaign financed with lots of cash may not win elections on their own, but they get attention. And getting voters to pay attention is more than half the battle.

I’ll leave forecasting to pollsters, but as Rick Bell says here: “Politics has come to Alberta.”

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Categories: General | No comments

Wildrose rolls on

- October 7th, 2011

Daniellesmith
There’s no rest for an opposition party trying to be, at the very least, the top opposition party and, at best, the governing party come the next election.

The selection of Alison Redford as Tory leader hasn’t seemed to slow Danielle Smith or the Wildrose Party either.

They have wasted no time in rolling out some pretty effective attack, or “contrast” ads, focusing on the flip-flop on fixed election dates and holding a fall legislative session, and her track record of supporting Ed Stelmach’s policies then campaigning against them.

And while some political writers are trying to focusing on the attack ads, and the Wildrose’s list of the top 40 mistakes the Tories have made in their tenure, as proof the Wildrose aren’t giving voters an alternative, they’re forgetting the comprehensive policy document released this week by the party.

Obviously, a party’s policies aren’t going to appeal to everyone, but there’s no denying Smith and her party have put a lot of work into making a case that they are ready to govern, and at the very least, offering alternatives that are hold the Tories’ feet to the fire. Even all the talk of change coming from the Tories is due in large part to the Wildrose.

A slick ad campaign is just one piece to the puzzle, and the Wildrose’s critics forget that at their own peril.

Tags: , , , , ,
Categories: General | 3 comments

Our Tory nannies

- October 26th, 2010

A new session of the legislature got underway in Edmonton this week and in addition to some contentious bits of government legislation — the Alberta Health Act and a distracted driving law among them — we’re seeing some interesting motions being brought forward by individual MLAs.

Some have a lot of merit — Wildrose MLA Rob Anderson wanted to cap government spending at inflation plus population growth and Tory Kyle Fawcett (with whom I have had some public disagreements) is pitching the disallowance of in-year surplus spending. That one isn’t so much a concern now, with the province still in a deficit situation, but I like where their heads are at.

But I am often left wondering where some of these MLAs get their ideas.

Private members’ motions aren’t always the sort of thing to wind up becoming law, but some of the motions coming from Tory MLAs are troubling.

It would be easy to dismiss the notion of booze warning labels, mandatory helmet use or forcing a decision on organ donation as the musings of individual MLAs.

But it surely fits well with other intrusive measures taken by the government as a whole, like the smoking ban, higher booze prices, prohibiting tobacco displays in stores, the upcoming distracted driving law, and, worst of all, the justice minister’s support for random breath tests.

Surely we are warned plenty about the ill-effects of booze, in advertising, in bars and in liquor stores. And yet, Calgary backbencher Moe Amery feels the province need to force producers to put warnings on the labels as well.

The use of helmets for ATV and snowmobile enthusiasts is another hot topic. Every year we hear of injury and death involving people using these high-powered machines.

But really, what kind of idiot is hopping on one without a helmet? Do we really need to legislate against stupidity? And laws like this don’t take into account that snowmobiles and ATVs can kill a rider without inflicting a massive head injury. Should people wear a helmet? Most definitely. Is it the role of the province to force them to? It shouldn’t be.

Lastly, while I have nothing against the organ donation program, why is an MLA trying to force Albertans to make a decision on whether they want to offer the gift of life in the event of their death. It may seem minor, and maybe a little petty, to question what is simply a single check in a box on the back of your healthcare card, but the notion of being forced to do it smacks as heavy handed. Because it’s simply a motion at this point, little is known about how they would force us to oblige, or what penalties we’d face if we didn’t.

But surely the government, and backbench MLAs have better things to do than to meddle in the lives of average Albertans.

Tags: , , , ,
Categories: General | 1 comment