Comments on: Alberta PCs propose uninviting federal Tories to annual meetings.

By: jazzhed

jazzhed — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 22:49:41 +0000

To Change AB:

Can you describe for me/all of us *exactly* how the PC Premier “allowed” the NEP, and how it was a “deal” between them? Are *you* “graduated” to an introspective level of history to remember the turning down of the taps in response? How was that “allowing” or “making a deal” on the NEP? If you are referring to the Sept. 1981 Canada/Alberta Energy Agreement *in response* to the NEP, that was *quite* another matter.

By: Change AB

Change AB — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 16:00:19 +0000

For those who still keep harping about the NEP. If Harper was in the same situation as Trudeau, he would have done some level of taxation distribution to keep the country running. Its the few things that sink ships, Natural Disasters, Poor Economy, people suffering and joblessness. Trudeau had the last three, and as a Federal Politician, his priorities are different than a provincial premier, he still has to keep the country running and can’t let people starve. WHile it angered Albertans the NEP was introduced, it was a PC premier that was on board to allow it. ND’s and PC lovers keep forgetting that little fact. In all fairness, if the table was turned and the same situation was facing Harper, he would not let the country starve to death while Alberta prospered. This sort of short sighted prioritization would sink the conservatives. Having said that, Trudeau did what he had to do for that time. He can’t create money and wealth out of thin air. Immediate priorities must have been met. Provincial and Federal priorities will always be inherently at odd with each other. Trudeau was unfortunate enough to have landed in that economic era. Bumpkin AB’s need to graduate to more expanded levels of introspect on our history. It was P-C Tories who were in office in AB, NOT prov. Liberals. THe NEP was a deal between FED Libs and Provincial Tories. Prov. Libs are guilty of only eating a black jelly bean.

By: Change AB

Change AB — Tue, 06 Nov 2012 15:51:44 +0000

Its only a matter of time, until the Prov. Cons (closet case progressive centrists) and Fed Cons. are on a collision course. They are ideologically very different, despite the name “Conservative” Both the Fed Conservatives and Provincial Tories are only on their legs because they “borrowed” progressive votes to their rise. History always proves to be true. What was once borrowed, must be given back, just like any other loan. Puritan conservatives, there are not enough of them to form a popsicle stand, let alone a gov’t. It therefore stands to reason that eventually, thorugh devices of their own greed, corruption and ineptness and taking voters for granted, these progressives will cycle back to the center. What this means is a guaranteed rise of the center once again. It is a cycle. In AB, the Tories, like their social credit predecessors will vanish and the Federal Tories, like Mul-Roney’s Conservatives will also wither and dither. Neither parties can maintain balance for ever. Turn over to Liberal will be inevitable, both provincially and federally. Having said that, those future LIberals will suffer the same fate as the Tories. This cycle is needed for a healthy democracy to stay somewhat functional. As of now, we are way overdue for a cyclical turnover to maintain a healthy democracy. The ND’s will not be invited to this cyclical party to power by the voters. The ND’s will always remain relevant to champion human, environment and social issues, while the center and right keep changing chairs. As said earlier, the shuffling of chairs is way long overdue, yet inevitable.

By: Mike Blanchard

Mike Blanchard — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 08:28:09 +0000

If David Climenhagha is offering advice to Alberta PC’s, it shows how far left the party has drifted. Yikes. Be afraid.

By: Seriously?

Seriously? — Sun, 04 Nov 2012 07:25:27 +0000

I heard of the mystical split between the Alberta and Federal Liberals but history never really seems to support it.

Who was Alberta Liberal leader in 1974? Oh it was none other than Nick Taylor who would go on to warm a nice seat in the Senate.

But you know if Taylor and the Alberta Liberals of the early 1980′s would have come out and criticized the National Energy Program maybe they wouldn’t have been associated with the Federal liberals?

But if Taylor had stood against Trudeau than maybe he wouldn’t have gotten appointed to that Senate seat from the then Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources Jean Chretien.

Is it also not coincidental that the Federal and Alberta Liberals reached the apex of their popularity in Alberta in 1993?

Why has no Alberta Liberal leader publicly criticized the federal Liberals for their anti Alberta policies?

By: Bomber Bill

Bomber Bill — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 22:40:46 +0000

If the Alberta PCs are smart, they’ll do this in a heartbeat. The CPC is increasingly extremist and will do anything to destroy the ProgCons. Get rid of them before it’s too late.

By: Radical Jack

Radical Jack — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 21:46:18 +0000

Why should the provincial PC party give delegate spots to the federal party when the federal party doesn’t do the same?

By: Wade Izzard

Wade Izzard — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 08:07:59 +0000

I do not know how a blog post about the Alberta PC’s propose uninviting federal Tories to annual meeting sparks comments about the Alberta Liberals.

The split between the ALP and the LPC happened in 1974 and was very clear until Dr. David Swann moved the party closer to the LPC.

This was a bold move for the ALP.

The PC party doing this to Federal MP’s is a slap in the face. This is just petty politics and there does not seem to be any upside for them to do this to the CPC.

This smells like something many Federal Liberals who hold PC memberships (and there are many) might be behind this move. They want to pull the party to the far left and run against Ottawa in the next election.

I think it will just be fun to watch.

Wade

By: Matt Grant

Matt Grant — Fri, 02 Nov 2012 14:16:30 +0000

Darren, what you’re suggesting regarding the Alberta Liberals has been the case for years now. The two parties are distinct entities. Of course, there are many like me, who carry both memberships, but that’s a personal choice each member makes. Were there Liberal MPs in Alberta, I don’t believe that would afford them any special powers within the ALP, constitutionally speaking. Of course, they would be superstars, but that’s beside the point. Have a great weekend.

By: Bob

Bob — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 22:50:29 +0000

Really, who cares about the CPC MPs who, by the way, NEVER SHOW UP. The more interesting amendment is to remove the 15 delegate slots per federal CPC riding association. In actuality, these slots are usually taken by committed PC Alberta members, who didn’t get on the delegate slate at their provincial constituency association meetings. That’s going to cut a lot of grassroots members out of the process and further the grumblings about the policy development process (which is usually ignored by MLAs anyway). There should be as many delegate slots as there are registrants. Let’s open up the policy development process, just like we opened up the leadership voting process. Too common sense for the geniuses on the constitutional review committee, I guess.

By: Jonathan

Jonathan — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 16:03:40 +0000

Dave,

I am most interested in the comment you had at the end – about the leadership selection. There were so many party establishment feathers ruffled with the Stelmach/Redford victories that I’m surprised it took the PCs so long to re-examine the process . I’m sure Dinnig and Mar are grumbling that it’s about time!

By: Darren

Darren — Thu, 01 Nov 2012 15:18:11 +0000

Smart move. The provincial organization should be there to represent provincial interests first and foremost, leave the national interests up to the federal level. The Alberta Libs should also look at this and look for ways to put some distance (perceptual or actual) between itself and the federal Liberals.