Alta Election

[coppertop]

grassfarmer, although we like to think we are rural, we do need to remember that there are urban centres within our constituencies that are made up of many people who do not follow rural issues, or care for that matter.
I think the Premier did make some necessary steps to address the EUB issues, the acting chair cleaned house at the EUB, and overturned the AltaLink decision, so that, in itself showed leadership in my opinion. The
WestEnergy decision at Rocky Rapids is going to the court of Appeal, and if the decision is overturned or found to be flawed in any way by the courts, I would suspect that there will be more changes to the ERCB mandate.
The turnout in the election was dismal to say the least, but it is certainly comparable to the very low turnout and complete lack of interest in the October municipal elections. The people that have issues get out and vote, and one thing for sure the PC party got their vote out this time around.

[per]

If the people of Alberta were mandated to vote by law, who would the other 58% vote for.

20% green
30% liberal
20% WRA
15% NDP
15% PC

It would still have been an PC win but there would have been plenty of opposition. I guess we never will really know for sure.

[grassfarmer]

"I think the Premier did make some necessary steps to address the EUB issues..." Yes he certainly did - introducing Bill 46 so that landowners no longer have the few rights they had in the past. In future any pipeline, powerline or water injection project can be steam rollered through regardless of citizens concerns. Just another indication of the "puppet of big business status" of our PC government. Still I guess you can justify that the same way as the Premiers transport donations - corruption is ok because the other guys are at it too.

[coppertop]

grassfarmer, it appears that you are suggesting that I condone corruptness....pretty strong statement !
In my time I have helped oust a corrupt municipal council that were bent on self serving ways...nobody has ever accused me of condoning corruption.
If candidates for political office did not accept any donations, only the very rich would be able to serve, which is something I hope I never see. I am proud to live in a society where a farmer who is the grandson of immigrants that came to this province without a dime, can work hard, earn the respect of his community first and then his party, and finally the people of Alberta. Bill 46 obviously didn't concern the majority of the people who voted on Monday....if it would have, the result would have been very different.I was in attendance at the AAMD C Convention when the question was posed from the floor regarding Bill 46, and the answer given by Mel Knight seemed to satisfy the majority of those in attendance....and they represent every citizen in rural Alberta.
I think that the Land Use Framework is going to dictate where pipeline and power line corridors will be, and hopefully those affected landowners will receive appropriate compensation. Pipeline corridors are long overdue, there is so much land sterilized by pipelines across the province that certainly has a monetary effect on numerous land owners. Hopefully when pipelines are proposed people are fighting tooth and nail to be compensated for the loss of use of those lands for any purpose other than agriculture....eg: subdivision and location of buildings etc.
All one has to do is view the presentation by Brad Stelfox and you can see what effect pipelines, lease roads, cutblocks etc. have on land use in our Province.
Still, without these resources, we would be a have not province, particularly if we had to depend on the livestock industry to support rural Alberta communities. The situation the livestock industry is facing worries me a lot more than Bill 46.

[grassfarmer]

"..is going to dictate..." being the operative words. This is the problem with a one party state. It's a dictatorship that will allow the greed of big business to steam roll over the needs and wishes of Albertans.

[coppertop]

I view it differently grassfarmer. I have been involved in decision making on land use issues for well over a decade and the problems that arise with pipelines and power lines across numerous tracts of private land are huge.
Municipal Land Use By-Laws and Municipal Development Plans both dictate what kind of development can take place in different zones. This does not mean that every municipality is a dictatorship....just that there does need to be rules that apply to everyone....

The fact this province has a very one sided government is due to decisions made by the electorate...if it would have been the party you favored grassfarmer that ended up with 72 seats would you feel the same way ???

[per]

Whether it is Grassfarmer's or my party of choice, it would have been good to see a robust opposition. In this type of British system a larger opposition helps with accountability. Grassfarmer, it is impossible to please everyone all the time. You can work to change things next time. Also work within the system until then. As I said earlier, it takes lots of work to affect change. No amount of complaining will be very effective. (well a little complaining might be good for the soul)

[coppertop]

per, I agree with you, it would have been nice to see a good effective opposition. The key is effective, the Liberals and ND's wasted so much time just digging up what they thought was dirt on the government vs bringing forward some positive suggestions.
When Ed was elected leader he immediately introduced All Party committees, something that Klein would have never done.
I would have liked to see a couple of Green Party MLA's and a couple of Wildrose/Alliance as well, but it is tough to unseat long serving MLA's because many of them are former municipal councillors that served their constituents well for years.

I take a wait and see attitude to who goes into cabinet, and then give them a year to see whether or not they are working in the best interest of all of us. I think the best possible way for grassfarmer to work toward changes is for him to consider running for municipal council in 2010, counties do a wonderful job of lobbying government and for the most part they get results.

[GreenValley]

coppertop, I think you have overlook, with Bill 46, it was passed on the morning of 3am, only just 1 hour of debate. Why on earth PC so rush and push to get Bill 46 passed and why in in 3am morning so that few people attend at meeting. Calgary Mayor has opposition this Bill 46. The main purpose of this Bill 46 is that they want less hearing concerns meaning we or some of people may can't attend meeting which we losing our rights. Our living standard is losing not better you has overlook. AGT phone bill was 20.00 and now over 55.00 yuck, power was 200 yearly and now over 1000 yuck, and list go on. Shame on PC. Look at homeless has increase, pity on them. Look at house value soar. Pity on them for 40 years mortgage.

[cakadu]

Coppertop, in my opinion, the reason the majority of citizens were (presumably) appeased by Mel Knight's response is that the majority of them are NOT in any way affected if they live in an urban setting. They cannot have their land expropriated or taken away or not be informed that there is going to be activity on their land. Let's face it, with today's "me, me, me" attitudes, if it doesn't affect me, it doesn't matter.

The fact that the Bill was passed in the middle of the night, and most importantly, with SO many amendments should be concerning for all of us.

Our urban cousins should be concerned because if it can happen in the rural areas, it can happen in urban areas as well. Simply put, Bill 46 was an encroachment on our rights as landowners and it may be taken to court at some point.

As for the Land Use Framework helping out, I wouldn't hold my breath. I was part of the process and was hopeful that more would have come out of it.

I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt and hope that new Ministers will be more receptive and willing to make change.