“The current preoccupation with professionally produced ‘content’ is probably more a distraction than help in planning for the future.”
— Andrew M. Odlyzko from Content is not King
Those words struck out at me like a knife. While the quote is actually from a paper on the Internet’s present and future, it came at the time I was contemplating our electoral process.
The analogy, its inherent warning as applied to our most recent federal election and its potential application to the current Alberta ‘drop of the writ’ were just too much to not take heed. Federally, I can’t recall any issues being debated that assisted with planning for our future.
Provincially, I have been left with decision anxiety around the incredible similarities in campaign messaging. Have you noted that even the billboards copy style and content? Who is ‘proven’, progressive (in what context) or has ‘leadership’?
Message to the leaders — help me out here.
Here are a few of the issues around which I will frame my decision.
* THE ALBERTA ADVANTAGE: For the record, I believe we have one. As Albertans, we must maintain the comparative advantage within our confederation and continue to address overall competitiveness within NAFTA. Traditionally, we may have compared ourselves to neighbouring provinces but in Calgary today we recognize our true competitors to be within the North American environment.
There are 31 cities of between 500,000 and one million population with which we compete for new enterprise. The Alberta advantage has been built on co-dependency. Business needs people, people need business and the quality of life to which we’ve become accustomed relies on the continued success of both.
Please discuss policies recognizing that having attended to reasonable needs of our lowest-income citizens, redistribution is not the answer, equal opportunity to succeed is.
* INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE 'DEBT-FREE' DIVIDEND: Our world is changing. Alberta is becoming increasingly urbanized. Today, fully 68 per cent of our population lives in Alberta’s two largest cities. Calgary is growing. That growth has put incredible stress on our existing infrastructure.
While the province may soon be debt free, our major cities are not. Coming civic elections will discuss the problems with funding debt while needing to pay for solutions to road and growth-related infrastructure problems. Calgary continues to finance debt related to the initial round of LRT construction and more is required.
In 1940, Calgary was a mere 90,000 in population. In the lifetime of many reading this, we have grown to be 10 times that size. Projecting that growth rate forward, we’ll require an infrastructure capable of sustaining nine million people — and all in the lifetime of the younger reader today.
Any ideas? I hear that in Calgary, today’s debt payments could actually fund the outstanding portion of the GO Plan.
* HEALTH CARE: As business people, we too often accept the label. We are people first, sons/daughters, parents, children all, and we are members of the 34 per cent when surveyed that said health care was the overwhelming issue in the coming election. Creativity in provision of these essential services is essential. Doing the same things the same old way will not yield a substantially different result.
* EDUCATION: Education is critical, but let’s think more broadly about this than has traditionally been the case. Education is important both to our future and our present. Our children going into the system will require new skills in a new world, but just as important is the need for continuous learning.
Technology is moving quickly and we are short of skilled workers in many areas. Headlines are screaming that there are 250,000 jobs available but not enough trained people to fill them.
* ELECTRICITY DEREGULATION: Saved the best for last. Let’s step back a little from the rhetoric and emotion of the debate. To date, recognizing that the horses are out of the barn, both the Liberals and the Tories have suggested there are benefits to continuing the deregulation process, just in slightly different ways.
To put this in context it might be helpful to note what others, far from the heat of this debate, are saying. CIBC World Markets has studied the issues in the broader context of all changing North American markets. The short version is their belief that the problems experienced in California are unlikely to be replicated here.
The caveat contained in this analysis, however, is that Alberta consumers will benefit as long as we do not interfere directly with the marketplace signals. Whatever the policy for interim support to consumers, capping market prices will erode supplier confidence and we will end up paying to build new generation through government. It will take longer and be more expensive than the opportunities before us today with both traditional and wind or smaller co-generation plants.
Ideas and policies should be practical, we must be able to get there from here. Ideology dressed as policy without practical application is no policy at all.
I look forward to reading something more out of this debate other than someone may be evil incarnate or the creature from the dark side. This is Alberta and we value integrity.
(Barry Rempel is the president of the Calgary Chamber of Commerce. This is the second in a series of columns on the Alberta election and the implications for business and the community. Watch for another unique Calgary perspective next week.)
