The real reason gender reassignment surgery was delisted.

I love debate! For a few reasons. First, it helps me to think comprehensively about an issue. I truly enjoy considering what others have to say about an issue, while I analyze my own biasses on the issue. Furthermore, debate allows for effective policy making. So long as the participants debate the merits of the issue and avoid partisan and personal attacks, we end up with well thought out decisions.

I enjoy twitter because it is a forum to share information and interesting stories, and it is a forum that encourages healthy public debate (reminiscent of London's speaker's corner). Today's blog post is inspired by the discussion I had last night with Doug Griffith (@GriffMLA) and one of our friends from Alberta: Get Rich or Die Trying (@AB_get_rich). The topic was delisting of gender reassignment surgery (GRS).

What I am about to say requires a couple of important caveats. I acknowledge that I have no idea what it's like to be born into a body of the wrong gender. So whenever I'm in the situation of speaking about people for whom I don't know what its like, my motto is to be compassionate. I also acknowledge that no segmented group will speak with one voice - there will always be individual opinions within a group of people with similar lived experiences.

I decided shortly after budget day that I would discuss the delisting of GRS regularly. I decided this because I suspect that most transgendered people just want to live their lives happily and comfortably - they don't want to have to get into public debate over this very personal matter. Therefore, on this issue, I know that they are going to need as much help and support as they can possibly get. Ultimately, that is what makes the decision to delist GRS so repugnant - we are forcing a small disadvantaged marginalised group of people to stand up for something that in many ways only matters to them, but matters so much to them.

My argument today, though, has less to do with morality and more to do with finance.

Generally speaking, there are two types of budgeting: status quo and zero based. In status quo budgeting you begin with the budget from last year and add and delete items to create the new budget. In zero based budgeting, you start with nothing and simply add the items that you want to have to create the new budget. To the best of my knowledge, the Alberta government uses a status quo based approach.

The benefit of status quo budgeting is that it is faster and easier. One of the problems, however, is that you end up with a lot of "beige" programs staying on the books - programs that have no inherent problems, but have no great benefit either. When it comes time to trim spending what typically happens is someone goes through the items and tries to identify the ones that need to go. The items that cost the most tend to be examined more thoroughly and the ones that cost the least tend to stay put.

Thus, I come to my biggest concern with the decision to delist GRS. People involved in the budgeting process were given the task of cutting spending (I suspect that Liepert also suggested to do so by delisting procedures). While big fish like chiropractic care were targetted, someone chose specifically to chase after the tiny fish of GRS. The financial savings amount to around 1/200th of a percent of the health care budget, or the equivalent of 20 cents per Albertan. The reason why GRS was chosen was not financial, it was political. The people who approved this strategy knew they could get away with it - because typical Albertans and the Conservative base would applaud the move and the people who are affected by it are a small group of people that we don't understand. The owner of the gym I go to, essentially called them freaks.

This type of politics is appalling. We need to make decisions based on what is the right thing to do and what is in the best interests of the people of Alberta. Our politicians need to ask the question, why was this decision made and not accept finance as the answer - because it simply isn't so.

So how much does Suncor get?

If you read my post yesterday about the vase distributor you will see here that he has done quite well for himself. I don't want the phrase Alberta Advantage to die, it fits so well for the oil companies.

On a related note, have you ever wondered how much money Albertans lost because of Conservative mishandling of the Heritage Savings Fund. I have. (h/t Alberta: Get Rich or Die Trying)

Martha and Henry pass on - what to do with our inheritance?

Imagine, if you will, that your grandparents were collectors of extremely rare and valuable... oh let's say vases. When they passed on, they left to you a basement full of these vases - more vases than you could possibly imagine.

One day, a vase distributor comes to your door and offers you $10 each for some of your vases. You sell him two and he goes down to the market and sells them for $20 each.

The next day he comes back and says he will buy 10 vases for $10 each. Realising that the extra income means you only have to work part time that day, you sell him the 10 vases. He goes down to the market, where they really like the vases and sells them for $40 each.

Day three - the distributor wants 100 vases (he'll pay $10 each). This means you can take the whole week off. He heads down to the market, where the biggest vase collector has come to buy, and sells them for $100 each.

Before the next day rolls around, your kids suggest that maybe you should charge more for the vases. But since you don't have to work anymore, have a ton of vases left and are reliant on the distributor, you decide not to mess with a good thing and keep the price at $10. The distributor comes by, you sell him another hundred vases and he sells them at market for $150.

Unfortunately on the fifth day, the big collector lost his job and isn't buying anymore vases. The distributor shows up and only wants to buy two vases. It's not enough for you to live off, so either you starve or go deep into debt. Forget about getting a job, there's none left!

Call it simple but the analogy fits for Alberta. In the past 17 years the Conservatives have slashed taxes on corporations and the wealthy, removing all of our sustainable and self-reliant income sources. They've sold off enormous amounts of our non-renewable resource for a pittance while oil companies have walked off with record profits. Worse of all, government has hardly saved a dime.

We need to think about our oil as an accumulated reserve, and every time we cash in one of those barrels we are trading future prosperity for immediate gain. We have a responsibility to future generations of Alberta to not squander this opportunity and to make the most of the money we generate from selling off our oil!

Funny... the conservatives used to talk about sustainability.

Government Plan: Do nothing and everything will be okay.

Smiling Iris, Alberta finance minister, appeared in front of media on Thursday to announce that Alberta will lose 15,000 jobs and carry a $1 billion deficit from 2008/09.

Let's look at the government estimates over the course of the year:

Date	Revenue	Oil (Est)	Oil (Act)	Expenses	Surplus
April 2008 Budget	$38.6 B	$78	$112	$37 B	$1.6 B
August 2008 - Q1 Update	$46.6 B	$119	$117	$38.1	$8.5 B
November 2008 - Q2 Update	$39.9 B	$94	$57	$37.9 B	$2 B
February 2009 Update	???	???	$42	???	-$1 B

It will be interesting to see how the revenue and expense numbers fill out when Evans releases her third quarter update next week. If she knows the $1 Billion deficit number, then she likely knows the other numbers and is trying to release information slowly.

What I found particularly interesting though are some of the rose-colored glasses type statements made in the press release.

The province’s economy is expected to recover beginning in 2010 with modest economic growth. Evans said Alberta is well positioned for recovery, with low unemployment and inflation, a strong resource base, a competitive tax regime, an investment- and business-friendly environment, significant financial assets, and a fiscal framework designed to deal with the ups and downs of volatile resource revenues.

“As we emerge from these turbulent times, we will position Alberta to be the engine of the Canadian economy,” she said.

The government has convinced themselves that Alberta is above the rules of
global economics and that this global economic catastrophe is simply a one,
maybe two, year long wave that we can just ride over.

They go on to discuss their plans for weathering the storm:

The Alberta government’s plan for weathering the downturn includes keeping a close eye on government spending, drawing from its emergency savings to protect the programs and services Albertans rely on, continuing to build public infrastructure to support jobs and the economy, and promoting the province to a global market.

These actions include ... maintaining a low and competitive tax environment - which was enhanced this year with the elimination of health-care premiums, resulting in the injection of $1 billion back into the economy. Government will also continue to invest in public infrastructure through the 2008-11, $22-billion capital plan, a commitment that far outstrips that being spent elsewhere in Canada.

This isn't a plan! This is a combination of tired Conservative rhetoric (keeping an eye on spending, promoting the province to a global market, maintaining a competitive tax environment) and previously announced plans that public pressure forced the government to undertake (overcoming the vast infrastructure deficit, eliminating health care premiums).

This government has always lacked real innovative foresight and been slow to react to legitimate concerns of Albertans. This is a time for real leadership and a real plan instead of tired rhetoric and rose-colored glasses.

A few of my favourite things

I commend all the other bloggers out there who manage to post thoughtful pieces on a regular basis. I subscribe to many of their RSS feeds using Google Reader and subsequently "Share" the ones I like. So between work and home life, I find barely enough time to read the material being put out let alone contributing in a thoughtful way on a regular basis.

So for today's post, I want to encourage you to scan my shared items which are linked to over there (------>) and here.

But I also want to share a few of the things that really grabbed my attention lately.



Dinner with a Stranger

Franke James is an artist who presents her Visual Essays on her blog My Green Conscience. Her latest posting Dinner with a Stranger is incredibly inspiring. Read it and enjoy!



Lost Generation

Perhaps you've already seen this video, as I was referred to it by Ken Chapman who pulls out a lot of these gems. But if you haven't take the time to watch it - its incredibly creative and powerful. I taught high school for 7 years and the greatest thing I learned in that time: "The Kids are all right"!





World Food Program

This is another great video to put things into context. Its a PSA from the United Nations World Food Program featuring Sean Penn. Thanks to AdFreak for this.

Turns out the No Plan commercials were right.

Who knew the anti-Stelmach commercials from the last campaign would end up being right?

Ed Stelmach has no plan for dealing with this recession, so he turns to the only strategy the conservatives know when revenues drop - Massive cutbacks.

It seems to me, Ed was the guy we should have had as premier in the early part of this decade, back when Ralph was the guy without the plan.

Seen as it was Building Trades of Alberta behind "No Plan" it seems appropriate to use the renovation metaphor here.

See back in 1993, Ralph Klein looks at the public service in Alberta and decides that it is a building where expansions have been put on haphazardly (in his mind) and is this big ugly monstrousity. His bright idea... time for a renovation.

Klein is a master at demolition, he goes and tears things apart. Rips off all of the drywall, tears down whole wings of the building and even blows up the infirmary.

Klein looks at his work and is very happy, so he decides to sit back and take the next ten years off. In the meantime things turn good in the economy and the public service starts to rebuild. Spending announcements are made in a reactionary fashion with no coherent plan in place. The government claims they are spending more than they ever have, but little of the spending is planned sustained investment in the core programs that were cut.

Eventually, Klein admits that he hasn't had a plan for government and the Tories decide to turf him. They replace him with Ed, because Ed has a plan and a vision for government spending. But, oops - the money is gone, revenue has dropped and there is nothing left of the boom because the money was spent with no plan in place and no savings made.

We've been saying for years:

1. Royalty rates are too low and we're not getting our fair share.
2. The money we are getting from the boom needs to be saved.
3. The boom will end - it always does.

Unfortunately, I-told-you-sos don't achieve much now and its time for a new plan on the economy. But resorting to the same old Conservative playbook will only make things worse!

City of Edmonton to pay half the costs for a new McDonald's!

So, imagine this...

Ray Kroc comes to Edmonton, says "you guys really like Big Macs, don't you?"

"Wouldn't it be a shame if the McDonald's weren't here and Edmonton couldn't get Big Macs?"

"Well, we need to build a new McDonald's and since you guys like Big Macs and you want there to be McDonald's here - I think you should give my franchise owner Daryl here some money to build a new McDonald's. Just take some of your tax dollars and pay for half the store so Daryl can make his business successful and overcharge you for Big Macs!"

Sounds ludicrous? Well that's precisely what Gary Bettman is telling us we should do!

Daryl Katz is involved in the hockey business because he loves the game and is a big fan, but more importantly he is involved because he knows that having his name connected with the national game will get more people into his drug stores and sell more cold medicine than any other marketing campaign.

"I looooove the Oilers!! I'm the biggest Oilers fan in Edmonton and Rexall supports the Oilers - I'm going to buy all my kids Diapers at Rexall!" - That's the strategy in a nutshell. And if that doesn't work he could always muse about having to move the team until he gets a government bailout or more people develop their photos at a Rexall family pharmacy.

In actuality I have nothing against Katz and I think he's got his heart in the right place, but let's see the issue for what it is - a ploy to put public money in private pockets.

Something smells worse than the manure

Let me get this straight...

Ralph Klein was a standardbred horse owner. While in power, he along with at times finance minister Shirley McLellan provided repeated bail outs to the industry. The industry embarks on expensive ad campaigns, not promoting the races as entertainment (as Northlands does) but simply promoting the industry as being important to Albertans. Now McLellan is the Chairperson of Horse Racing Alberta, with her hand out?

For some reason, I have little sympathy.

Making Coalition Government Work

Read this great article by Duncan Cameron on rabble.ca:

When she was elected NDP member for Edmonton Strathcona in the last election, Linda Duncan probably did not think she would shortly be a cabinet minister. But as the only non-Conservative member from Alberta she is certainly entitled to a cabinet post in the coalition Liberal/NDP government likely to be formed - as early as next week - because Stephen Harper has misunderstood how parliamentary democracy works.
The people elect the parliament, but governments are formed (and undone) by parliament. Winning the largest number of seats only entitled the Conservatives to form a government, and only at the invitation of the Governor General. Losing the confidence of the House of Commons, as the Harper government did when its economic update failed to recognize a worldwide economic slump and the need for stimulus, and promoted restraint instead, opens the door for a coalition government to take power - at the invitation of the Governor General.

More...

Goldring Watch - Episode 2

And now, he speaks. November 26, 14:50:

Mr. Peter Goldring (Edmonton East, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, the motion passed last March by the House specifically called for the government to secure medium-lift helicopters and unmanned aerial vehicles to better protect our brave men and women in Afghanistan. Can the Minister of National Defence tell the House when we will
have these helicopters and UAVs in Afghanistan?

Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of National Defence and Minister for the Atlantic Gateway, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to providing our brave soldiers with the best possible equipment. In fact, we have recently purchased six Chinook helicopters and UAVs in addition to those that were leased, all of which will be operational next year. I am pleased to tell the House that we will also deploy eight specially-equipped utility Griffin helicopters to act as escorts for these Chinooks. Most importantly, this will help reduce the risk to soldiers and civilians from ambushes, landmines and IEDs, all of this saving lives and continuing the important work of Canadian soldiers in theatre.

Not to say that we aren't all concerned about the safety of our soldiers, but... wow, nothing like back bench government members softballs in question period - providing wonderful opportunities for ministers to take up time patting themselves on the back, instead of holding the government to account for their actions. Take a look at what a rookie opposition member does in question period as opposed to our fifth term representative. So, I challenge you Mr. Goldring, how can you bring the concerns of Edmonton East (here or here)to parliament instead of being just 1 of 143.