Jason Kenney's Very Bad Bet

 Jason Kenney bet our money on Trump winning. No doubt he was shocked when whatever the GOP was doing to try to ensure a win didn't work. It was supposed to work, you see. Whatever it was. But it didn't, and here we are, with an angry Premier shouting at and blaming everyone else.

We are seeing a grown man who made a very bad calculation, having a very public meltdown. He invested in a risky deal and it fell through. Now he seems to think he is owed some sort of compensation. That really isn't how the world works.

Of course, all that money is a bit of a windfall to TCE. They are cutting their losses and getting out, laying off workers. And they are going out the door with our money. Why isn't Kenney asking for the oil company to give it back? Unless, of course...It was a gift, and the success of the pipeline was neither here nor there.

There have been a lot of gifts to oil and gas from this UCP government. They haven't resulted in the thousands of new jobs Kenney promised. But maybe that wasn't the point...

Promising jobs was maybe just to get elected, and to give cover for doling out billions to friends and donors. Kenney has doled out a lot of our money to friends & donors in the past two years, one of the most egregious being hiring Harper's 24 year old son for upwards of $100K. I mean, honestly, Ben Harper only got that plum job (part-time!) because he is the son of Kenney's good friend and mentor. There's a word for that... Ah, yes, nepotism. Creating a job for a friend's kid, and paying an outrageous salary, for...what, exactly?

But there are a ton of other examples. The War Room, the inquiry into "Un-Albertan" activities, the many panels and advisors who always say exactly what the UCP tells them to say, endorsing foreign-owned for-profit health care...

Kenney and his party seem to think that being in government is a license to reward supporters, curry favour with corporations (many of them foreign, like Australian coal companies), and engage in the worst sort of cronyism, while completely ignoring the needs of regular Albertans

If this bothers you (and it should) please take a moment to write to your MLA, and cc the NDP and the media, because goodness knows, your correspondence is probably going straight into the trash at your MLA's office.

The UCP are not above the law. Jason Kenney is not a king. They are supposed to work for us. They don't appear to be doing that. They appear to be working for themselves and their friends. We need to let them know, in no uncertain terms, that this is unacceptable.

James McGill Buchanan: Part Two

 Conservatives like to talk about "corruption". A lot. But do they mean the same thing most people mean by the word? I think many people would consider a political party doing something that does not benefit the people, but rewards their friends as corruption. 

Say, for example, a Minister of the Crown who passes legislation liable to directly benefit a family member or themself, to the detriment of the public good. That seems like corruption.
pressprogress.ca/albertas-healt…

Alberta’s Health Minister Holds Shares in a Private Company That Connects Customers To Things He Recently CutAlberta’s health minister is resisting calls for his resignationhttps://pressprogress.ca/albertas-health-minister-holds-shares-in-a-private-company-that-connects-customers-to-things-he-recently-cut/

Or a government that invents panels & advisory positions for friends & donors & arranges for these panels and advisors to return reports and recommendations that mirror what the governing party wants to do, but with the guise of "research" and "impartiality". Seems corrupt.

Young Ben Harper gets a well-heeled start in politics, thanks to dear old dad’s former lieutenant - Alberta PoliticsGive Ben Harper’s old man his due: he got his son a better first job in Alberta than the elder Mr. Harper’s pop got him. Readers with functioning short-term memories will recall that not so long ago m…https://albertapolitics.ca/2020/10/young-ben-harper-gets-a-well-heeled-start-in-politics-thanks-to-dear-old-dads-former-lieutenant/

UCP gave 'non-partisan' MacKinnon panel chair speaking notes, op-ed advice, documents showGovernment staff had a hand in crafting a May 2019 speech and newspaper editorial for Janice MacKinnon, the chair of the Blue Ribbon Panel into Alberta’s Finances, according to internal emails.https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/ucp-gave-non-partisan-mackinnon-panel-chair-speaking-notes-op-ed-advice-documents-show-1.4790831

Or, a government that changes electoral boundaries and/or rules to favour their party in the next election. Or makes backroom deals where advantages are offered in exchange for funding PACs and promoting the party. Those seem like corruption.
 

Doug Ford Made a Secret Backroom Deal to Sell ‘Big Chunk’ of Toronto’s Greenbelt to Developers‘I wish I could say it’s my idea, but it was their idea as well,’ Ford told Ontario PC gatheringhttps://pressprogress.ca/doug-ford-made-a-secret-backroom-deal-to-sell-big-chunk-of-torontos-greenbelt-to-developers/

Alberta car dealers funnel cash to political ad groupThe province's car dealers association allegedly trying to halt sales of 15-year-old RHD "Asian" importshttps://driving.ca/auto-news/news/alberta-car-dealers-funnel-cash-to-political-ad-group

Fair Elections Act 'just a way of blocking all sorts of people,' groups argue in court | CBC NewsA group representing Canadian students and a veteran activist are accusing the Harper government of trying to import U.S.-style voter suppression tactics for political gain ahead of the next federal e…https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/fair-elections-act-id-rules-block-voting-groups-argue-in-court-challenge-1.3136431

The James McGill Buchanan definition is subtly different. I now present you with a quote from @NancyMacLean5 's book, "Democracy in Chains" which illustrates this point...
 

"Buchanan believed with every fibre of his being that if what a group of people wanted from government could not, on its own merits, win the freely given backing of each individual citizen, including the very wealthiest among us, any attempt by that group to use its numbers to get what it wanted constituted not persuasion of the majority but coercion of the minority, a violation of the liberty of individual taxpayers." 

In other words, he viewed governments who do things the majority (or large groups of citizens) wants, in order to get re-elected, as corrupt, if those things impinged upon the wishes of anyone (particularly the wealthiest).  

So, current Canadian conservatives (who seem to be advocates of the Buchanan school of thought) would feel that, for example, a government raising the minimum wage against the wishes of wealthy business owners, is corrupt. 

Obviously, a government that is run on Buchanan's principles would do nothing in crisis situations, if the wealthy did not like the action. The CPC have strongly indicated that they feel CERB and other pandemic relief is deeply suspect. 

They want to have a committee to examine the "corruption" of the Liberal government in setting up programs to help people. They have signaled that they would have done nothing. Just as Harper did not want to act on stimulus spending during the recession of 2008. 

The Buchanan philosophy gives the wishes of the extremely wealthy preeminence, because he felt their rights were being infringed by any government action that interfered with their ability to be wealthy and continue to amass wealth. 

Remember, from my first instalment about Buchanan, that his theories emerged from a deep resentment of having to treat black citizens in the southern US equally, and the associated costs of that to the wealthy taxpayer. 

Buchanan's philosophy is predicated on the notion that people are not equal. The wealthy are more important and must not be victimized by the not-wealthy, even though the not-wealthy have far greater numbers. 

Most of us understand democracy as a system in which people vote for a candidate from the party they feel will most benefit their community or the country. And the governing party tries to work to the public good, thus pleasing the people, and being re-elected.

In pleasing the people, in a system where number of votes matters more than people's bank accounts, large groups of not-wealthy people have power. Buchanan would say this "pleasing the people" is corruption, because it doesn't protect the interests of the wealthy few.

It is important to understand when conservatives speak these days that their terms of reference may not be the same as most people's. Likewise, their goals may be completely at odds with those of most Canadians.

Stay tuned, there will be more about Buchanan soon!