If there is one certainty in Tuesday’s upcoming provincial election, it is that whatever party voters choose to lead the province – the incumbent Progressive Conservatives, the New Democrats, the Wildrose, the Liberals or even the Alberta Party – the problems the government will face Wednesday will be the same problems we face today.
Falling oil prices, after years of prosperity, have left the province and its main moneymaker scrambling to pay the bills. Many public sector salaries, such as those in health care and education are reported to be the highest in the country. Do we face years of labour strife now that much of the money to pay those salaries has dried up, or will longer wait times and bigger classrooms become the new norm? Are there other alternatives? Our province needs a stable economy that can fend off the huge valleys and peaks of world oil prices. If diversification is the answer, how can it be achieved, keeping in mind that earlier government funded schemes have been disasters? Some of our previous governments have proven to be nationally embarrassing, to say the least, yet the new leader we must now collectively choose must be competent, respected and experienced enough to lead us through what truly promises to be some worrisome times, no matter what party he or she belongs to.
Government, of course, is only part of the economic equation, though an important one. Does it help business – and thereby nascent prosperity – by keeping its taxes low or maintaining current royalties, as the more fiscally conservative parties suggest? Or is this the time to make business and our primary industry pay more in taxes and royalties? As a voter, it is every Albertan’s responsibility to weigh the possible consequences of either decision. Considering that Cenovus, a major player in the oilsands, reported a loss of more than half a billion dollars in the first quarter this year, in addition to the thousands of oil patch workers who spent the winter unemployed, perhaps now is not the time to travel that route because the timing of major changes will also likely have potentially unpleasant consequences.
It is also important to remember that change is not an inherently bad thing. Times change, policies change and governments change. Few would likely argue that when Peter Lougheed and his young pals swept into the legislature in the early 1970s that it was a bad thing for the province. Change does not need to be feared. However, it can also be argued that the fallout from many subsequent elections has not been so positive. Change also demands careful consideration.
A time-tested strategy in making decisions, like the ones we face Tuesday, is to make an old-fashioned list of the pros and cons on each of the issues you consider most important. People do it when they buy a car or change jobs, so do it when you vote. We suggest you set emotions and old loyalties aside. If you need help, we have prepared a chart on page nine that will help you see where the parties stand.
When your list is complete, read it over and make your decision. Then remember the words of Ed Koch, the late mayor of New York, who said, “If you agree with me on nine out of 12 issues, you should vote for me. If you agree with me on 12 out of 12 issues, you should see a psychiatrist.”
