Taxpayers grade the candidates...

[ivbinconned]

November 14, 2006

Grading the PC Leadership Candidate Responses


Morton and McPherson top list of candidates responding to 16 CTF questions

Complete Candidate Responses

EDMONTON: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) today released responses from Alberta’s PC leadership candidates to 16 key questions posed by the CTF.

Part two of A Taxpayers’ Platform, publishes and grades the responses, A through F. Questions are broken down into four categories: Taxes, Spending, Democratic/Transparency Reform, and Health Care Reform. Individual question grades were determined by a panel of CTF provincial directors and averaged to create a category grade and an overall grade.

The CTF makes clear that this survey and grading is not an endorsement of any candidate, but rather public information on where candidates – and Alberta's next premier – stand on priority issues advocated by the CTF. Moreover, this survey provided a written commitment from our next premier to the same.

Overall:
Ted Morton: B
Gary McPherson: B-
Mark Norris: C
Lyle Oberg: C
Dave Hancock: C
Victor Doerksen: C-
Jim Dinning: D
Ed Stelmach D


Taxes:
Ted Morton: B-
Lyle Oberg: B-
Gary McPherson: C
Dave Hancock: C-
Mark Norris: C-
Victor Doerksen: D
Jim Dinning: D
Ed Stelmach D

Spending:
Ted Morton: A
Gary McPherson: B
Jim Dinning: C
Victor Doerksen: C
Dave Hancock: C
Mark Norris: C
Lyle Oberg: D
Ed Stelmach: D

Democratic/Transparency Reform:
Gary McPherson: A
Mark Norris: B
Lyle Oberg: B-
Dave Hancock: C
Ted Morton: C
Victor Doerksen: C
Ed Stelmach: C-
Jim Dinning: D

Health Care Reform:
Ted Morton: A
Lyle Oberg: A
Mark Norris: B
Gary McPherson: C
Victor Doerksen: C
Jim Dinning: D
Dave Hancock: D
Ed Stelmach: D

“We are particularly pleased to gain firm commitments from four leadership candidates to adopt the CTF’s long-held position to eliminate health care premiums,” said CTF-Alberta director Scott Hennig. “Considering nearly all of the opposition leaders have already committed to the same, health care premiums may soon be a thing of the past.”

“However, we are disappointed only one candidate (Ted Morton) gave taxpayers a firm commitment to introduce a spending limit law,” continued Hennig. “Statutory limits were key to balancing the budget and paying off our debt in Alberta, it’s now time to take the next step and put the brakes on the recent trend of wild spending increases if we want to ensure future sustainability.”

“It’s interesting to see the one non-politician, Gary McPherson, trumped all the other candidates when it came to committing to democratic and transparency reform,” stated Hennig. “He clearly recognizes what the politicians don’t – the status quo won’t cut it when it comes to transparency and democracy in Alberta.”

The purpose of the Taxpayers’ Platform is: to pin leaders down on issues that have fallen below the radar (and not been part of candidate platforms), to inform CTF supporters and the public on where candidates stand on priority issues advocated by the CTF and finally, to gather written committments from our future premier and cabinet ministers.

Complete copies of A Taxpayers’ Platform, including full responses by the eight leadership candidates can be found on-line by clicking here or by contacting the Alberta office at 1-800-661-0187.


For further information contact:
Scott Hennig, Alberta Director, CTF - AB
Ph: 780-448-0159

[wilagro]

CTF...another rightwing group which I don't have much use for.

Anyway, ivebinCONned, I thought you lived in Saskatchewan. Why all this interest in Alberta politics?

[TOM4CWB]

Wheat on cusp of brave new world
Alan Kohler
November 18, 2006

NEXT week the Honourable Terence Cole, QC, will present his report to the Government on the Inquiry into Certain Australian Companies in Relation to the UN Oil-For-Food Program, a rambling, bureaucratic euphemism for "AWB Ltd".

So will begin the end of Australia's single-desk wheat marketing system and the end of AWB itself.

The wheat export system will be "unbundled" - that is, different contracts will be let for treasury, transport, trading and marketing, all of which are now done by AWB. It is also possible that a timetable will be placed on a phase-out of the single export desk legislation entirely and a date put on the start of contestable export marketing arrangements - say, 2010.

AWB itself will cease to be. The company will almost certainly demerge: AWB International, the subsidiary that actually holds the single desk licence, will be handed over to the wheat growers who hold voting A shares in AWB, probably in full payment for their shares. AWBI will then sack AWB as provider of wheat export services, and change its name from AWB International. Suggestion: Australian Wheat Board.

As for what's left of AWB Ltd, it will be a race between renaming it Landmark Ltd and selling it to the highest bidder. I think an investment bank will be given a mandate to auction the company, which might happen faster than the name can be changed and the company's management refocused on its remaining businesses.

It's mostly, but not only, Landmark, the rural services network that used to be called Dalgety, and which AWB bought from Wesfarmers in 2003. After it loses the contract for servicing Australia's wheat export and trading monopoly - probably in time for Christmas - AWB will still own a network of three overseas trading offices in Geneva, India and Brazil that might be of interest to international grain traders such as Cargill and Louis Dreyfus.

The legislative single desk wheat export licence is held by AWB International. AWBI contracts its parent company, AWB, to actually provide the services required - trading, transport, storage, marketing and treasury services, including hedging.

In thinking about the future of wheat sales, the single desk licence and the task of administering it need to be separated. Ending the single desk requires legislative change and that is very unlikely to happen outside a trade negotiation. All countries that are signatories to GATT, including Australia, have agreed to end export subsidies by 2013, and that includes a statutory monopoly for marketing wheat. So as things stand the single desk is now due to end in seven years.

The Government would only bring that forward to, say 2010, as part of a new multilateral trade round, or perhaps a review of the free trade agreement with the United States. No point giving something up without getting something in return.

But that doesn't mean AWBI must continue to contract AWB to provide the single desk services in the meantime. As I understand it, arrangements are already being put in place for the two companies to demerge and for AWBI to go to tender separately on the various services it needs in order to carry out the single desk functions. Perhaps Macquarie Bank would get the treasury, Graincorp the transport contract, Cargill the marketing, someone else the insurance and so on. It's unlikely that a single company would ever again get a bundled, monopoly contract for the lot.

At the same time, but separate from all this, is the fact that the national wheat pool is near collapse anyway because of the drought.

Apart from providing one marketing face to the world, the wheat pool and single desk system gives wheat growers economies of scale in handling and marketing that obviously improve the more wheat that goes into it. The threshold for the system to break even is 4 million tonnes of export wheat a year.

The average wheat crop over the past five years is 21 million tonnes, of which 5 million goes to the domestic market. Last year, 2005-06, was a good year - the crop was 25 million tonnes, which means 20 million tonnes was available for export (ironically, just as AWB was imploding it was having a wonderful year in wheat exports).

For this financial year the crop is estimated to be about 9 million tonnes, leaving exactly 4 million for export. Any further cut in the crop would put the export pool underwater and unable to pay its bill - leaving the board of AWBI with no alternative but to declare the operation effectively bankrupt and appoint an administrator.

In some ways that would be the easy way out for everyone - the administrator would simply take over from AWB and start contracting out the services. No hard decisions required. The demerger and sacking of AWB could still take place, but it would be forced on everyone by the drought, rather than AWB's incompetence and corruption.

Meanwhile, an important question for the current board of AWB is whether that incompetence and corruption should cost their shareholders any more money. AWB's share price is now exactly half what it was a year ago, which means the company's value has fallen by $900 million.

Landmark is earning EBITDA (earnings before interest tax depreciation and amortisation) of close to $100 million and net profit of about $50 million. Futuris, the owner of Elders, trades on a price-earnings ratio of about 14 times, which would put a value of roughly $700 million on Landmark - $200 million less than the market capitalisation of AWB now.

The task of the AWB board therefore is to try to get a control premium for the business, including the network of three overseas offices, so shareholders don't lose any more value than they have already lost.

Hello private equity.

Alan Kohler publishes Eureka Report, a newsletter financially backed by Carnegie, Wylie & Co. The views expressed here are Kohler's alone, not those of Carnegie Wylie

http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/wheat-on-cusp-of-brave-new-world/2006/11/17/1163266777414.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1

[ivbinconned]

I was born and raised in Alberta. All of my family is in Alberta including my kids and grandkids. And by the way...they are voting...you guessed it.

I notice you like playing on my name ivbinconned. Tell you why I chose it.

I once was liberal but like a maturing puppy...my eyes where opened.

That and the accepting of the fact that I am human and at times prone to form opinions without having all the facts.

It is liberating to admit one is wrong about something and testify to that fact. Takes character.

I noiticed that copper felt that because he had met all the candidates his view of their character is more valid than mine. Thinking about that...I doubt that Peter McKay would agree.

Obviously, and I think often, being too close can skew ones judgment.

So Iv-BEEN-conned...emphasis on the been part.

Thanks for asking and have a good night.

[cropduster]

Gonna be a chilly one but our family is going out too IVB!!!

[cowman]

CBC says the three contenders are Morton, Dinning, Oberg. Don't know where they get their info but that is who they are saying will make the cut!
So...if they are correct...who do the others' supporters go to?
What say you coppertop?

[craig]

Interesting that the AWB situation will likely provide us with another example of life after single desk selling. While the Ontario situation was claimed to be not a good example the Australian situation will likely parallel Canada( large Export Program). Interesting to see what unfolds.

[cowman]

Nov. 25 vote:
Dinning 30%
Morton 26%
Stelmach 15%

Some popular bloggers are saying Dinning needed 40% to stand a chance in the second go around. The call now is for Morton on the second round!
Dinning is percieved by many to be the "old boys" pick, you know the party elite! Time for a bit of "Prairie Fire" to keep this "do nothing" hack out of the premiers office?
When Stephen Harper endorsed Quebec as a nation it started the ball rolling toward more money and power for Quebec? That might not be how Harper sees it...but you can bet that is how Quebec sees it!
Now where is that extra money going to come from?...you guessed it...Alberta! Jim Dinning has said he sees no problem including resource revenue in the equalization formula! In other words: The $14 billion Alberta sent to Ottawa this year is about to go up in a BIG way...if Dinning gets in!
There is only one candidate that is saying NO WAY...and that is Morton!
If you think we should donate more of our assetts to Quebec...VOTE FOR JIM DINNING!

[WRAPper]

As usual Cowman your talking out of your hind end not your front end, but all three candidates have their good points and their bad, Stelmach can't make the hard decisions, Dinning is viewed as the backroom boys pal. And Morton wants to build a governors errr premiers residence in Edmonton at a time when what we really need is schools and hospitals. Kind of interesting timing for Harper to bring up the Quebec thing don't you think??
I laugh at Mortons less Ottawa more Alberta does he mean less Harper more Morton. ohhhh the bogeymans comin....

[coppertop]

sorry cowman I was busy all day yesterday with getting people out to vote. I think the comment by WRAPper that Ed can't make tough decisions wasn't made by anyone who knows him. Ed is known for the ability to make tough decisions, not only as an MLA and Minister but during his municipal political career as well. He seems pretty meek and mild but sometimes leaders that exhibit a quiet strength are the ones you want beside you or leading you into any battle, vs having someone that goes off half cocked and starts a rumble when there is no need for one.

We are in for a very interesting week in Alberta, my phone has been ringing all day with people wanting memberships because they didn't bother to vote on the first ballot but now they want to ensure that they candidate they feel will do the best job gets elected.

Thankfully the weather is supposed to break and be warmer for Saturday, so people can get out without freezing or ending up in the ditch.

[WRAPper]

You think that I don't ?? You think wrong, but Ed is and still is in my top three (well two actually)for the job so interestinly enough no matter which way it goes now I'm going to be satisfied. I accomplished what I wanted yesterday.
That said I hope people are thinking long term on what the different choices we have in front of us now mean long term and get real serious about how they vote come Sunday. Have a good week unlike alot of people on here some of us actually work lol(just kidding)

[cowman]

Well coppertop, who knows how this thing will turn out? So far you're pretty good with your predictions! Ed made the cut and has to be considered a good shot, what with Oberg and Hancock going over to him! And I think the "anybody but Dinning" thing is alive and well?
I guess it will probably come down to whoever can get out the vote? I would imagine the Dinning camp is moving heaven and earth right about now! A lot of free memberships being handed out!
I do find it interesting that the Taxpayers Association finds Ed about the worst choice...but they are a right wing group...so what can that mean? Hmmm...Stephen Harper was the CEO of that group, wasn't he?