Originally published in FFWD October 25, 2007 by Drew Anderson in City
The Women’s Centre of Calgary will play host to a conference celebrating its 10 years of independent service to women, at a time when issues of poverty, politics and commerce are increasingly important. Our booming economy can be an unforgiving beast for women, and the recent municipal election saw two incumbent female aldermen lose their seats.
Lisa Hari, an education and outreach worker at the centre, and one of the organizers of the conference, says the point is to have women tell their own stories. “We actually went out and said, ‘Hey, we’re planning a conference and what would you like to talk about?” Participants were further asked to look at the media and consider misrepresentations, misinformation and unaddressed issues pertaining to women.
The conference, titled Connections, will feature individual sessions covering everything from connecting with corporate Calgary to sex and gender diversity issues. Each presenter will have a personal connection to the material and a story to tell.
“I think what’s unique about this conference is that it’s women living the issues,” says Hari. “We have a woman that’s a vice-president of a bank coming to talk about women in corporate Calgary. So it’s women that are telling their stories, and I think that’s what is so great about this conference.”
In light of the recent ejection of two women from city council, the session on women and politics is particularly timely. Susan Stratton, co-chair of Equal Voice (Southern Alberta chapter), president of the Alberta Green Party and a Raging Granny, will speak about how women can participate in politics and increase representation. “There are statistics, both federally and provincially, and now at least in Calgary in the civic arena, about the poor representation of women. So we’ll be mentioning those stats certainly, that we may have come a long way, but not in politics,” she says.
Stratton believes that having more women involved in the political process will help soften the often-harsh world of Canadian politics and foster a greater spirit of co-operation. “I just think that the culture of politics as it’s usually practised is an issue. The tendency to attack and pull each other down rather than looking to co-operate and get something done is very obvious in Canadian politics,” she says. “You get more women in, you change the culture and the expectation, so it is kind of a chicken and egg thing.”
According to Stratton, it is not simply a matter of being elected to office, either. Women can participate in politics on a number of levels, she says, citing the rise of Elizabeth May to leader of the federal Green Party through the Sierra Club.
This loss of representation at all levels of government is troubling when so many women are suffering through the boom times in Calgary. According to Hari, there are a lot of women coming to the centre with housing issues. She says there is “definitely an increase because of rental hikes. So that might mean people need more food, or more personal care items, or they can’t afford to do things for themselves.”
Livia Quequezana, a presenter on women and poverty at the conference, knows the dangers of Calgary’s high cost of living from personal experience. After moving here with her family one and a half years ago, Quequezana struggled and was forced to live on welfare before her husband found a job.
“Almost all of the welfare I received went to pay the rent, which is huge here in Calgary,” she says. There was the additional burden of a sick child and the difficulty of establishing themselves in a new city, but she says they were lucky to receive generous help from city agencies including the Women’s Centre.
“That’s why I keep in touch with the Women’s Centre. I am always grateful to them because they provided us with food, clothing, tickets for recreational activities, any kind of information about schooling and supplies, they are a very good support for women in need.”
Quequezana is presenting at the conference in order to encourage other women to speak up. “The only way to have support is to talk about it,” she says. “I would encourage women to talk about their own issues to get the support that they need, because here in Calgary, they will find many kinds of agencies and many good people that will help in many ways.”
Hari hopes that the conference will live up to its name and foster communication between a diverse group of women with unique stories to tell. “That’s why we’re calling it Connections. Not only are people talking about what is their perspective, what’s their current issue, but having the opportunity to listen to other women and building those connections, building some understanding.”
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Goodbye to the Western Standard
The free market eats one of its own
Originally published in FFWD October 25, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Viewpoint
Woe is the state of conservatism in the world, when those that preach fiscal responsibility seem to have the hardest time keeping their operations in the black, governments and a magazine among them.
Western Standard, the ranting right-wing rag that purported to represent the opinions of our corner of the world, was unable to attract enough attention in its worldview to keep it afloat. According to publisher Ezra Levant, speaking recently to the Globe and Mail, it will likely carry on in some form on the Internet, but we are thankfully without its continued presence at our newsstands. Why is it that conservatives, who constantly lecture on fiduciary responsibility, whether it be from the podium or in print, have such a hard time keeping their own finances in order?
The Conservative provincial government is the highest spender per capita in the country. To give it credit, it is debt-free, but that is largely due to excessive spending cuts in the ’90s, and the sea of oil we happen to live upon. The increased infrastructure, health and social spending we see today is an attempt to make up for those very same cuts, made by the same party, though with a different face. The Conservative provincial government, as indicated by the recent royalty review, has also done a poor job of ensuring Albertan’s financial interests were protected in the extraction of our natural resources. It hasn’t even kept proper records on finances in the tar sands.
Each year, the Conservative provincial government announces larger-than-expected budget surpluses, something now imitated by its federal counterpart and ideological brothers in arms. These surprise surpluses are never really a surprise, and are just a political ploy to curry favour with the electorate by unveiling extra funds, while hiding the fact those funds were available in the first place for social spending. Regardless, it doesn’t instill confidence in their ability to mind the books.
It’s almost too obvious to point out the situation south of us, where a conservative president has turned a large surplus into a terrifying deficit and helped speed his country towards a recession.
In the same Globe interview, Levant says that his magazine’s end is not an indication of a downturn in conservative support in Alberta and across Canada. This point is open for debate, especially in light of the inadequacies of our own government becoming more and more clear. What isn’t open for debate is the fact that Levant’s magazine, for whatever reason, couldn’t pay the bills.
The Western Standard operated for only three years as a print publication, taking up the reins of the also defunct Alberta Report magazine. Alberta Report was started by Ted Byfield, a well-known right-wing curmudgeon who also helped found the Reform Party. That magazine, after passing into the younger right-wing hands of Link Byfield, was also unable to sustain the finances necessary to continue, despite once boasting an impressive distribution.
Perhaps Levant should have followed Byfield’s strange lead and started the Standard as a quasi-religious endeavour, paying its commune-living writers $1 a day. Surely that would have bought some much-needed time and helped build up revenue.
Maybe Levant should have instituted his own spending cuts, like the conservative governments he lauds Levant could have reconsidered his driving practises and pumped some of the money he pours into his Hummer back into the magazine. That car isn’t fiscally responsible no matter how you look at it. But cuts aren’t for conservative leaders or pundits, they are for the rest of us.
Levant, a former National Post columnist and communications director for Stockwell Day’s disastrous stint as Canadian Alliance leader, banked on his showmanship and ability to antagonize in order to keep his marginal magazine afloat.
Decisions like printing the Prophet Muhammad cartoons that sparked such outrage around the world were nothing but irresponsible attention-seeking, couched in free-speech rhetoric. It turns out that being a jerk on a national level doesn’t help sell magazines, it just makes you look like a jerk.
In the Globe and Mail article, Levant says the publication was never purely an economic enterprise, but a moral one as well. It’s a good thing, too, because it never did turn a profit. Many would also argue his claim about the moral returns he insists it engendered.
This is what he had to say to Fast Forward in August 2006, while defending some of the blogs that were supported on his magazine’s website: "Sometimes people are rude and bigoted and sometimes people are anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic and that entire spectrum is allowed on our website, because unlike in Fast Forward, I believe that in the marketplace of ideas the good ideas will beat out the bad ideas." Turns out that in the marketplace of ideas, or just in the plain old-fashioned marketplace of which Levant is such a fan, being a jerk is just being a jerk, and being conservative does not mean you’re good with your money.
Originally published in FFWD October 25, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Viewpoint
Woe is the state of conservatism in the world, when those that preach fiscal responsibility seem to have the hardest time keeping their operations in the black, governments and a magazine among them.
Western Standard, the ranting right-wing rag that purported to represent the opinions of our corner of the world, was unable to attract enough attention in its worldview to keep it afloat. According to publisher Ezra Levant, speaking recently to the Globe and Mail, it will likely carry on in some form on the Internet, but we are thankfully without its continued presence at our newsstands. Why is it that conservatives, who constantly lecture on fiduciary responsibility, whether it be from the podium or in print, have such a hard time keeping their own finances in order?
The Conservative provincial government is the highest spender per capita in the country. To give it credit, it is debt-free, but that is largely due to excessive spending cuts in the ’90s, and the sea of oil we happen to live upon. The increased infrastructure, health and social spending we see today is an attempt to make up for those very same cuts, made by the same party, though with a different face. The Conservative provincial government, as indicated by the recent royalty review, has also done a poor job of ensuring Albertan’s financial interests were protected in the extraction of our natural resources. It hasn’t even kept proper records on finances in the tar sands.
Each year, the Conservative provincial government announces larger-than-expected budget surpluses, something now imitated by its federal counterpart and ideological brothers in arms. These surprise surpluses are never really a surprise, and are just a political ploy to curry favour with the electorate by unveiling extra funds, while hiding the fact those funds were available in the first place for social spending. Regardless, it doesn’t instill confidence in their ability to mind the books.
It’s almost too obvious to point out the situation south of us, where a conservative president has turned a large surplus into a terrifying deficit and helped speed his country towards a recession.
In the same Globe interview, Levant says that his magazine’s end is not an indication of a downturn in conservative support in Alberta and across Canada. This point is open for debate, especially in light of the inadequacies of our own government becoming more and more clear. What isn’t open for debate is the fact that Levant’s magazine, for whatever reason, couldn’t pay the bills.
The Western Standard operated for only three years as a print publication, taking up the reins of the also defunct Alberta Report magazine. Alberta Report was started by Ted Byfield, a well-known right-wing curmudgeon who also helped found the Reform Party. That magazine, after passing into the younger right-wing hands of Link Byfield, was also unable to sustain the finances necessary to continue, despite once boasting an impressive distribution.
Perhaps Levant should have followed Byfield’s strange lead and started the Standard as a quasi-religious endeavour, paying its commune-living writers $1 a day. Surely that would have bought some much-needed time and helped build up revenue.
Maybe Levant should have instituted his own spending cuts, like the conservative governments he lauds Levant could have reconsidered his driving practises and pumped some of the money he pours into his Hummer back into the magazine. That car isn’t fiscally responsible no matter how you look at it. But cuts aren’t for conservative leaders or pundits, they are for the rest of us.
Levant, a former National Post columnist and communications director for Stockwell Day’s disastrous stint as Canadian Alliance leader, banked on his showmanship and ability to antagonize in order to keep his marginal magazine afloat.
Decisions like printing the Prophet Muhammad cartoons that sparked such outrage around the world were nothing but irresponsible attention-seeking, couched in free-speech rhetoric. It turns out that being a jerk on a national level doesn’t help sell magazines, it just makes you look like a jerk.
In the Globe and Mail article, Levant says the publication was never purely an economic enterprise, but a moral one as well. It’s a good thing, too, because it never did turn a profit. Many would also argue his claim about the moral returns he insists it engendered.
This is what he had to say to Fast Forward in August 2006, while defending some of the blogs that were supported on his magazine’s website: "Sometimes people are rude and bigoted and sometimes people are anti-Muslim and anti-Semitic and that entire spectrum is allowed on our website, because unlike in Fast Forward, I believe that in the marketplace of ideas the good ideas will beat out the bad ideas." Turns out that in the marketplace of ideas, or just in the plain old-fashioned marketplace of which Levant is such a fan, being a jerk is just being a jerk, and being conservative does not mean you’re good with your money.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Contradictory Calgarians
By: Drew Anderson
Originally publihsed in FFWD, October 4th, in City.
According to two recent reports looking into the state of affairs in our city, Calgarians are a contradictory people. We are concerned about the environment, but do little to reduce our impact, we are concerned over traffic, but continue to drive. We are concerned about crime but feel safe in our neighbourhoods. We are considered conservative but have priorities and concerns more in line with a socialist.
The Calgary Foundation released Vital Signs, which asked participants to grade the city in various areas of concern, including the environment, while the Canada West Foundation, in its report Looking West 2007, examined citizens views on their city, with research in all major western cities and Toronto. Both studies asked respondents to rate priorities and asked for their perception of the city.
The results can be confounding. Despite ranking crime as the fifth priority out of 13 in Looking West, 81 per cent of us feel very or somewhat safe in our neighbourhoods after dark, the highest rating in the country.
Traffic and roads were rated priorities number one and two respectively, and in Vital Signs, our livable/walkable city grade was C-. However, individual citizens continue to drive. 78 per cent of us drive our own vehicle to work instead of taking transit according to Vital Signs.
Loleen Berdahl, the lead researcher on Looking West, says Calgarians want change, they just don’t necessarily want to pay for it. Although transportation was rated a top priority, later in the study respondents shunned almost all methods of funding the necessary improvements.
“I think that’s human nature. I’d love everything for free too, but it’s a big problem. I think the electorate needs to realize that if they want the city that they claim to want, they’re going to need to make some choices with that and there’s going to be some costs to be paid. Not only in terms of actual tax dollars or user fees, but also costs to be paid in terms of…some policy options that restrict types of growth or that provide incentives for certain types of growth or things like that,” she says.
Others see the need for the municipal government to step in and do a better job of addressing Calgarian’s concerns.
“People have aspirations of how they want our city to be, but a lot of it hinges on our government taking action,” said Noel Keough, a senior researcher with Sustainable Calgary who helped research indicators for Vital Signs. “It’s got to do with how we build the city, it’s not an individual’s choice really.”
With a municipal election scheduled for October 15th, the timing of the two reports is fortuitous; revealing the priorities, concerns and perceptions of ordinary Calgarians. It is hoped that the reports will spur discussion on the issues.
“It’s a citizens engagement exercise - the report, and the issues that citizens identified - the election will be over October 15th, but these issues will all be with us for much longer,” says Eva Friessen, President and CEO of The Calgary Foundation.
The reports, however, both highlight another significant issue with the contradictory nature of the municipal citizen, our political apathy despite the realization that the civic government affects our lives deeply.
According to Looking West, 48.7 per cent of us think that of the three levels of government, the municipal variety has the greatest impact on our lives. Yet in the last election only 19 per cent of us voted; one of the lowest turnouts in the country and earning us an overall grade of C in the leadership and belonging section of Vital Signs.
“Who knows how to interpret it,” said Keough, “but you might interpret it as people have not seen a local government that is effective in dealing with these issues, so why vote. That’s a bed set of decisions to make, but perhaps that’s what people are seeing.”
Dr. Keith Brownsey, a political scientist at Mount Royal College isn’t surprised by the apathy and doesn’t see these reports changing anything soon.
“We have very little interest, although people understand that civic politics affects their lives every day,” he says.
“They (citizens) couldn’t care less, the water comes. They only get upset when taxes go up, I mean gosh there’s a tax revolt if your property tax goes up by three dollars a year…I mean that’s where people get animated.”
Yet despite this, Calgarians appear more socially progressive than normally portrayed, and rated property taxes 11th out of the 13 priorities in Looking West, far behind affordable housing and homelessness.
“Every time we do priorities (in a study), lowering taxes ends up in the middle, never the top,” said Berdahl.
“I wasn’t surprised to see Calgary sitting very similar to the other cities, I actually think that despite its national reputation, Calgary is, in many ways, very progressive on a lot of issues.”
Originally publihsed in FFWD, October 4th, in City.
According to two recent reports looking into the state of affairs in our city, Calgarians are a contradictory people. We are concerned about the environment, but do little to reduce our impact, we are concerned over traffic, but continue to drive. We are concerned about crime but feel safe in our neighbourhoods. We are considered conservative but have priorities and concerns more in line with a socialist.
The Calgary Foundation released Vital Signs, which asked participants to grade the city in various areas of concern, including the environment, while the Canada West Foundation, in its report Looking West 2007, examined citizens views on their city, with research in all major western cities and Toronto. Both studies asked respondents to rate priorities and asked for their perception of the city.
The results can be confounding. Despite ranking crime as the fifth priority out of 13 in Looking West, 81 per cent of us feel very or somewhat safe in our neighbourhoods after dark, the highest rating in the country.
Traffic and roads were rated priorities number one and two respectively, and in Vital Signs, our livable/walkable city grade was C-. However, individual citizens continue to drive. 78 per cent of us drive our own vehicle to work instead of taking transit according to Vital Signs.
Loleen Berdahl, the lead researcher on Looking West, says Calgarians want change, they just don’t necessarily want to pay for it. Although transportation was rated a top priority, later in the study respondents shunned almost all methods of funding the necessary improvements.
“I think that’s human nature. I’d love everything for free too, but it’s a big problem. I think the electorate needs to realize that if they want the city that they claim to want, they’re going to need to make some choices with that and there’s going to be some costs to be paid. Not only in terms of actual tax dollars or user fees, but also costs to be paid in terms of…some policy options that restrict types of growth or that provide incentives for certain types of growth or things like that,” she says.
Others see the need for the municipal government to step in and do a better job of addressing Calgarian’s concerns.
“People have aspirations of how they want our city to be, but a lot of it hinges on our government taking action,” said Noel Keough, a senior researcher with Sustainable Calgary who helped research indicators for Vital Signs. “It’s got to do with how we build the city, it’s not an individual’s choice really.”
With a municipal election scheduled for October 15th, the timing of the two reports is fortuitous; revealing the priorities, concerns and perceptions of ordinary Calgarians. It is hoped that the reports will spur discussion on the issues.
“It’s a citizens engagement exercise - the report, and the issues that citizens identified - the election will be over October 15th, but these issues will all be with us for much longer,” says Eva Friessen, President and CEO of The Calgary Foundation.
The reports, however, both highlight another significant issue with the contradictory nature of the municipal citizen, our political apathy despite the realization that the civic government affects our lives deeply.
According to Looking West, 48.7 per cent of us think that of the three levels of government, the municipal variety has the greatest impact on our lives. Yet in the last election only 19 per cent of us voted; one of the lowest turnouts in the country and earning us an overall grade of C in the leadership and belonging section of Vital Signs.
“Who knows how to interpret it,” said Keough, “but you might interpret it as people have not seen a local government that is effective in dealing with these issues, so why vote. That’s a bed set of decisions to make, but perhaps that’s what people are seeing.”
Dr. Keith Brownsey, a political scientist at Mount Royal College isn’t surprised by the apathy and doesn’t see these reports changing anything soon.
“We have very little interest, although people understand that civic politics affects their lives every day,” he says.
“They (citizens) couldn’t care less, the water comes. They only get upset when taxes go up, I mean gosh there’s a tax revolt if your property tax goes up by three dollars a year…I mean that’s where people get animated.”
Yet despite this, Calgarians appear more socially progressive than normally portrayed, and rated property taxes 11th out of the 13 priorities in Looking West, far behind affordable housing and homelessness.
“Every time we do priorities (in a study), lowering taxes ends up in the middle, never the top,” said Berdahl.
“I wasn’t surprised to see Calgary sitting very similar to the other cities, I actually think that despite its national reputation, Calgary is, in many ways, very progressive on a lot of issues.”
Voter apathy is where the heart is
Calgarians ignore government that affects us most
Originally published in FFWD October 11, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Viewpoint
A civic election is upon us, and candidates for alderman and mayor are laying out the issues in a city overwhelmed. Transportation, development, the environment, crime and housing are all on the lips of potential municipal decision-makers, but does anyone even care? Based on the 19 per cent turnout rate in the previous election, the answer is no.
It is boring now to point out that we are in the midst of unparalleled growth, with our city facing enormous pressures due to an overheated economy and a population surge. It’s boring, but it’s true. This makes our choice of civic leaders all the more important. These people will be guiding development in our communities, closing streets in our downtown and coming to grips with our excessive environmental impact. They will manage our growth, open up green space and build our recreation centres. When the neighbours are pissing you off, it is their bylaws you turn to.
Last election we had one of the lowest voter turnouts in Canada. The one government that is the most accessible to us, that affects our lives more intimately than the provincial or federal versions, is the one that commands the least attention.
So far many of the campaigns for alderman and for mayor have focused on a select set of issues: transportation, housing, development, crime and the environment. There are other issues being raised, and some candidates who just rant incoherently (you know who you are), but almost every campaign lists these as priorities.
Our current city council has tackled all of these issues through the course of their present term, though with a checkered success rate. Homelessness and affordable housing are clearly growing out of control. Piecemeal solutions to shelter in the winter months have angered residents with not-in-my-backyard attitudes, and have provided only temporary relief to a situation that continues unabated. There has to be a commitment to solutions that last longer than a couple of months — like the recent conversion of the old Brick building on 16th Ave.
We need committed leadership in the realm of affordable housing. Mayor Bronconnier is promising incentives to private developers and rent supplements to those struggling with housing costs. This is not the recipe for a permanent solution to the housing crisis. There has to be pressure on the provincial government from all our civic leaders to impose rent controls and protect those on the edge from unreasonable rent increases. We need a council and mayor that realize we can’t simply build more affordable housing without addressing the issues that make the rest of our housing unaffordable.
Both the homelessness and housing issues would benefit from scrapping the ward system and instead electing councillors that answer to the city as a whole, and not communities focused on their own self-interest.
The environmental footprint of Calgary is an embarrassment that needs immediate remedy. Our sprawling suburbs and car-centric planning has gobbled up as much land as New York City, despite the fact we have over seven million less residents. Our infrastructure is taxed from servicing such a large area, while our emissions and energy consumption continue to rise in excess of our population growth. We need to focus on building up rather than continuously out. According to a recent report by the Calgary Foundation, 78 per cent of Calgarians use their car to get to work — not surprising considering the city’s layout.
Transportation is an important issue for this city. Roads are clogged with excess cars, construction can’t keep up, thousands move here every year and transit seems unable to match demand with drivers and routes. It is heartening that candidates, specifically in the mayoral race, are promising movement on the west leg of the LRT and beyond. What is disappointing is the lack of infrastructure around alternative forms of travel in our communities and downtown; walking and cycling in this city can be challenging.
There is concern about a perceived crime increase, when all statistics show a continuing drop in crime rates. The current council approved a new bylaw and additional police officers in one of their last moves before the election campaign, but it still remains to be seen if the money for those officers or the bodies to fill those positions will be found.
As reported in Fast Forward last week, a major issue that needs addressing is accountability. Campaign financing regulations are largely non-existent, and the potential for corruption is enormous. Mayoral candidate Alnoor Kassam is the one contender making the biggest noise around accountability and ethics at city hall. There are questions, however, surrounding his escape from Kenya amidst fraud charges and his economic eviction of tenants with a rent increase of almost $2,000. Kassam says he was vindicated on the fraud charges at his immigration board hearing and that he offered free rent to his tenants for three months before the new rates took effect.
And through it all there is one lone voice in the electoral soup that is focusing on apathy, mayoral candidate Jeremy Zhao. So while all the bluster carries on about cars and roads and crime and infrastructure, it is fitting that nobody can hear Zhao through the din. Probably for the best; if we took an interest in our municipal affairs, what would we bitch about over the next round of drinks at a smoke-free bar?
Originally published in FFWD October 11, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Viewpoint
A civic election is upon us, and candidates for alderman and mayor are laying out the issues in a city overwhelmed. Transportation, development, the environment, crime and housing are all on the lips of potential municipal decision-makers, but does anyone even care? Based on the 19 per cent turnout rate in the previous election, the answer is no.
It is boring now to point out that we are in the midst of unparalleled growth, with our city facing enormous pressures due to an overheated economy and a population surge. It’s boring, but it’s true. This makes our choice of civic leaders all the more important. These people will be guiding development in our communities, closing streets in our downtown and coming to grips with our excessive environmental impact. They will manage our growth, open up green space and build our recreation centres. When the neighbours are pissing you off, it is their bylaws you turn to.
Last election we had one of the lowest voter turnouts in Canada. The one government that is the most accessible to us, that affects our lives more intimately than the provincial or federal versions, is the one that commands the least attention.
So far many of the campaigns for alderman and for mayor have focused on a select set of issues: transportation, housing, development, crime and the environment. There are other issues being raised, and some candidates who just rant incoherently (you know who you are), but almost every campaign lists these as priorities.
Our current city council has tackled all of these issues through the course of their present term, though with a checkered success rate. Homelessness and affordable housing are clearly growing out of control. Piecemeal solutions to shelter in the winter months have angered residents with not-in-my-backyard attitudes, and have provided only temporary relief to a situation that continues unabated. There has to be a commitment to solutions that last longer than a couple of months — like the recent conversion of the old Brick building on 16th Ave.
We need committed leadership in the realm of affordable housing. Mayor Bronconnier is promising incentives to private developers and rent supplements to those struggling with housing costs. This is not the recipe for a permanent solution to the housing crisis. There has to be pressure on the provincial government from all our civic leaders to impose rent controls and protect those on the edge from unreasonable rent increases. We need a council and mayor that realize we can’t simply build more affordable housing without addressing the issues that make the rest of our housing unaffordable.
Both the homelessness and housing issues would benefit from scrapping the ward system and instead electing councillors that answer to the city as a whole, and not communities focused on their own self-interest.
The environmental footprint of Calgary is an embarrassment that needs immediate remedy. Our sprawling suburbs and car-centric planning has gobbled up as much land as New York City, despite the fact we have over seven million less residents. Our infrastructure is taxed from servicing such a large area, while our emissions and energy consumption continue to rise in excess of our population growth. We need to focus on building up rather than continuously out. According to a recent report by the Calgary Foundation, 78 per cent of Calgarians use their car to get to work — not surprising considering the city’s layout.
Transportation is an important issue for this city. Roads are clogged with excess cars, construction can’t keep up, thousands move here every year and transit seems unable to match demand with drivers and routes. It is heartening that candidates, specifically in the mayoral race, are promising movement on the west leg of the LRT and beyond. What is disappointing is the lack of infrastructure around alternative forms of travel in our communities and downtown; walking and cycling in this city can be challenging.
There is concern about a perceived crime increase, when all statistics show a continuing drop in crime rates. The current council approved a new bylaw and additional police officers in one of their last moves before the election campaign, but it still remains to be seen if the money for those officers or the bodies to fill those positions will be found.
As reported in Fast Forward last week, a major issue that needs addressing is accountability. Campaign financing regulations are largely non-existent, and the potential for corruption is enormous. Mayoral candidate Alnoor Kassam is the one contender making the biggest noise around accountability and ethics at city hall. There are questions, however, surrounding his escape from Kenya amidst fraud charges and his economic eviction of tenants with a rent increase of almost $2,000. Kassam says he was vindicated on the fraud charges at his immigration board hearing and that he offered free rent to his tenants for three months before the new rates took effect.
And through it all there is one lone voice in the electoral soup that is focusing on apathy, mayoral candidate Jeremy Zhao. So while all the bluster carries on about cars and roads and crime and infrastructure, it is fitting that nobody can hear Zhao through the din. Probably for the best; if we took an interest in our municipal affairs, what would we bitch about over the next round of drinks at a smoke-free bar?
Oil change
Albertans hungry for a fair slice of our petrochemical pie
Originally published in FFWD October 4, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Viewpoint
There has been a great deal of debate, gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair since the provincial government-appointed panel on oil royalties released its report: Our Fair Share. Oil companies are dusting off their doomsday arguments, left over from past royalty reviews, while regular Albertans wait patiently for the government to answer the report sometime in October.
Premier Ed Stelmach, in an attempt to demonstrate his Conservative government’s commitment to transparency and democracy, convened the panel to avoid the government confronting the oil sector on its own; a clear step away from the shoot-from-the-hip, thoughtless and perpetually destructive style of the former leader. Now we see the kinder, gentler, wimpier leader, always looking for an excuse to act.
That excuse came out with a bang on Tuesday September 18, with the proposal (gasp) to increase the royalties paid out by multibillion dollar corporations to us lowly Albertans; or as the report succinctly defines us: owners. There would also be some royalty reductions for low-producing conventional oil and gas wells, but increases would be seen across the board. In all, if approved, the higher rates should mean an extra $1.9 billion for the province’s coffers annually.
It turns out we’ve been getting a bum deal for quite some time, though exactly how badly we’ve been ripped off can’t really be answered, because the government, apparently, isn’t doing such a good job of keeping track of things like that. What we do know for sure is that we are below Texas, Alaska, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Norway, the U.K.; well, just about everybody. With the increases, we would still be near the bottom of this list.
It surely doesn’t come as a surprise to anybody that the government in Alberta is cozy with the oil interests that dominate our economy, but surely there was the assumption that it was keeping track of it all; adding up the figures. It wasn’t, particularly in the tar sands. This also leads to a situation where the royalties that were supposed to be collected may not have been.
According to the report: “In clear language, it seems that achievement of expected, intended royalty collections falls short of the actual amounts collected.” In other words, the report’s authors think we lost out on even more money, but they don’t have accurate enough numbers to know for sure.
In a testament to the lack of transparency and the sense of entitlement endemic to the Alberta Conservative dynasty, the panel isn’t even sure, given the lack of pertinent data, how decisions are being made in the tar sands.
“How the administration or public leaders make informed decisions in this vital arena is open to question,” says the report. That’s a polite, government panel way of saying things are insanely messed up with relation to one of the largest and most environmentally destructive industrial developments in the world. This is unacceptable.
The panel also took issue with the fact the same government department (Alberta Energy) is responsible for “maximizing activity in the energy sector and also ensuring that Albertan’s receive their ‘fair share’ from energy development….” This is seen as a fundamental conflict of interest.
To hear the oil companies tell it, these increases would spell the end of the “patch.” Billions of investment dollars would pull out and head for other territories. It seems too obvious to point out that the cost of production in these other oil and gas producing jurisdictions is greater than it is here. As well, almost all, including Angola, Nigeria, even Mexico, lack Alberta’s political stability and quality publicly funded infrastructure.
There is one concern that may prove accurate, and one the panel itself acknowledges: development in the tar sands may slow down as a result of the increase in royalty payouts. The panel wasn’t sure why this was such a bad thing, and I’m sure most Albertans will agree.
It’s only natural that an industry accustomed to reaping enormous profit would decry losing some of that income, but it’s not credible. It will continue to profit handsomely. Even if costs continue to rise, these will be considered a business expense. The oil and gas industry in Alberta has the advantage of operating in an environment that is not only stable, but in the case of the tar sands provides no exploration risk. As stated in the report: “In Alberta, we already know where the deposits are.”
In terms of cost, the panel called for both the government and the industry to improve their reporting and accountability of what constitutes a true business expense. As it stands, the regulations governing appropriate costs are ineffective.
“…Albertans need and deserve much more information on how costs are accounted for, and verified, in this system,” according to the report. These costs, after all, remove money from royalty payments. This applies as much to expansion of operations as it does to the gold watch given to the foreman on his last day. I hardly think Albertans want to pay for that. Though if this government refuses to implement the recommendations laid out in the report, we could spring for a few more after the next election.
Originally published in FFWD October 4, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Viewpoint
There has been a great deal of debate, gnashing of teeth and pulling of hair since the provincial government-appointed panel on oil royalties released its report: Our Fair Share. Oil companies are dusting off their doomsday arguments, left over from past royalty reviews, while regular Albertans wait patiently for the government to answer the report sometime in October.
Premier Ed Stelmach, in an attempt to demonstrate his Conservative government’s commitment to transparency and democracy, convened the panel to avoid the government confronting the oil sector on its own; a clear step away from the shoot-from-the-hip, thoughtless and perpetually destructive style of the former leader. Now we see the kinder, gentler, wimpier leader, always looking for an excuse to act.
That excuse came out with a bang on Tuesday September 18, with the proposal (gasp) to increase the royalties paid out by multibillion dollar corporations to us lowly Albertans; or as the report succinctly defines us: owners. There would also be some royalty reductions for low-producing conventional oil and gas wells, but increases would be seen across the board. In all, if approved, the higher rates should mean an extra $1.9 billion for the province’s coffers annually.
It turns out we’ve been getting a bum deal for quite some time, though exactly how badly we’ve been ripped off can’t really be answered, because the government, apparently, isn’t doing such a good job of keeping track of things like that. What we do know for sure is that we are below Texas, Alaska, New Mexico, Colorado, Wyoming, Norway, the U.K.; well, just about everybody. With the increases, we would still be near the bottom of this list.
It surely doesn’t come as a surprise to anybody that the government in Alberta is cozy with the oil interests that dominate our economy, but surely there was the assumption that it was keeping track of it all; adding up the figures. It wasn’t, particularly in the tar sands. This also leads to a situation where the royalties that were supposed to be collected may not have been.
According to the report: “In clear language, it seems that achievement of expected, intended royalty collections falls short of the actual amounts collected.” In other words, the report’s authors think we lost out on even more money, but they don’t have accurate enough numbers to know for sure.
In a testament to the lack of transparency and the sense of entitlement endemic to the Alberta Conservative dynasty, the panel isn’t even sure, given the lack of pertinent data, how decisions are being made in the tar sands.
“How the administration or public leaders make informed decisions in this vital arena is open to question,” says the report. That’s a polite, government panel way of saying things are insanely messed up with relation to one of the largest and most environmentally destructive industrial developments in the world. This is unacceptable.
The panel also took issue with the fact the same government department (Alberta Energy) is responsible for “maximizing activity in the energy sector and also ensuring that Albertan’s receive their ‘fair share’ from energy development….” This is seen as a fundamental conflict of interest.
To hear the oil companies tell it, these increases would spell the end of the “patch.” Billions of investment dollars would pull out and head for other territories. It seems too obvious to point out that the cost of production in these other oil and gas producing jurisdictions is greater than it is here. As well, almost all, including Angola, Nigeria, even Mexico, lack Alberta’s political stability and quality publicly funded infrastructure.
There is one concern that may prove accurate, and one the panel itself acknowledges: development in the tar sands may slow down as a result of the increase in royalty payouts. The panel wasn’t sure why this was such a bad thing, and I’m sure most Albertans will agree.
It’s only natural that an industry accustomed to reaping enormous profit would decry losing some of that income, but it’s not credible. It will continue to profit handsomely. Even if costs continue to rise, these will be considered a business expense. The oil and gas industry in Alberta has the advantage of operating in an environment that is not only stable, but in the case of the tar sands provides no exploration risk. As stated in the report: “In Alberta, we already know where the deposits are.”
In terms of cost, the panel called for both the government and the industry to improve their reporting and accountability of what constitutes a true business expense. As it stands, the regulations governing appropriate costs are ineffective.
“…Albertans need and deserve much more information on how costs are accounted for, and verified, in this system,” according to the report. These costs, after all, remove money from royalty payments. This applies as much to expansion of operations as it does to the gold watch given to the foreman on his last day. I hardly think Albertans want to pay for that. Though if this government refuses to implement the recommendations laid out in the report, we could spring for a few more after the next election.
Drabinsky's Triple Sensation
Garth Drabinsky lets young hopefuls compete for cash and glory in Triple Sensation
Originally published in FFWD October 4, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Television
Garth Drabinsky is a story unto himself. He’s wanted by the law in the United States on fraud charges, and faces similar charges here in Canada. He is the creative force behind the Broadway musical Ragtime, the producer of The Changeling and has been cited as one of the reasons for the resurgence in Canadian theatre.
His latest challenge is to convince us that his new CBC reality show, Triple Sensation, is worth watching and not just a copy of the uninspired dribble that too often graces our small screens.
Sitting in Catch, and speaking in a deep New York accent, Drabinsky proves three things over lunch: he’s charming, he’s passionate about his latest project and he’s not just mimicking “other shows.”
“They’ve bastardized the whole idea of what this sort of television could be,” he says, never once referring to other reality shows by name.
Triple Sensation follows a familiar premise: travel Canada holding auditions to look for talent that will compete for a prize. It is different on a few levels, however. The title refers to the fact that participants must be able to sing, act and dance and do it all extremely well. There is also a strong focus on training and growth of the performers, without the unnecessary cruelty seen on other reality shows.
Drabinsky was determined from the outset to present Canadian talent and not make a show that is intended to denigrate its participants or to promise them a fleeting moment in the spotlight. “It’s not that the panel pulls any punches. We’re rigorously honest in our assessment of the kids’ talent, but not mean in the process. Constructive criticism you learn from, constructive criticism is enlightening. Constructive criticism, in fact, can be very entertaining,” he says. “It’s not about making some profoundly inflammatory comment, baseless often, just for the sake of thinking that’s good television I don’t think that’s good television.”
The prize for the winner of the show is also something that sets it apart. Rather than promising fame, the winner gets a scholarship worth $150,000 for the institution of their choice — in other words, more training. “The only way to have longevity and be able to sustain a career creatively and economically is hard work, nothing short of hard work,” he says. “The scholarship is also part of the nobility of the show. I don’t dangle a walk-on part on Broadway. I say, ‘Here, I’m going to help you become greater. I’m going to let you study anywhere in the world that you want to study, but I want you to come back to Canada, and I want Canadian audiences, and ultimately world audiences, to stand and cheer for just who you are.’”
Drabinsky has managed to coax some big names onto his jury, and the cream of the performing arts crop to be trainers of the chosen few selected from thousands of initial hopefuls. The jury (or marquee panel as it’s called) consists of Marvin Hamlisch, Cynthia Dale, Adrian Noble, Sergio Trujillo and, of course, Drabinksy.
Once the field is narrowed to 12 competitors, they will be housed in the National Ballet building and trained by elite coaches from institutions like Julliard, the Metropolitan Opera and the Royal Shakespeare Company. Even the acting coach for Brad Pitt and Hillary Swank has a turn with the competitors. “This (the training) represents the only way you can be great in the performing arts, not an ephemeral moment of instant stardom, whatever it is the other shows try to give. One moment you’re something and the next moment you’re serving coffee at Starbucks,” he says.
Our waitress engages in a few playful exchanges with the producer, still unsure, but opening up about her piano playing, singing and tap dancing. She has stage fright, though. It seems too perfect, but Drabinsky insists she’s not a plant. You just know a performer when you see one, he says.
There is no doubt that Drabinsky, though usually behind the stage or the camera, is a performer himself, travelling across Canada convincing skeptical journalists of his show’s merit. He does a pretty good job.
One thing is clear — this show represents a truly Canadian attitude towards how we should showcase and cultivate young performers and not, as Drabinsky puts it, “make a mockery of the talent.”
Originally published in FFWD October 4, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Television
Garth Drabinsky is a story unto himself. He’s wanted by the law in the United States on fraud charges, and faces similar charges here in Canada. He is the creative force behind the Broadway musical Ragtime, the producer of The Changeling and has been cited as one of the reasons for the resurgence in Canadian theatre.
His latest challenge is to convince us that his new CBC reality show, Triple Sensation, is worth watching and not just a copy of the uninspired dribble that too often graces our small screens.
Sitting in Catch, and speaking in a deep New York accent, Drabinsky proves three things over lunch: he’s charming, he’s passionate about his latest project and he’s not just mimicking “other shows.”
“They’ve bastardized the whole idea of what this sort of television could be,” he says, never once referring to other reality shows by name.
Triple Sensation follows a familiar premise: travel Canada holding auditions to look for talent that will compete for a prize. It is different on a few levels, however. The title refers to the fact that participants must be able to sing, act and dance and do it all extremely well. There is also a strong focus on training and growth of the performers, without the unnecessary cruelty seen on other reality shows.
Drabinsky was determined from the outset to present Canadian talent and not make a show that is intended to denigrate its participants or to promise them a fleeting moment in the spotlight. “It’s not that the panel pulls any punches. We’re rigorously honest in our assessment of the kids’ talent, but not mean in the process. Constructive criticism you learn from, constructive criticism is enlightening. Constructive criticism, in fact, can be very entertaining,” he says. “It’s not about making some profoundly inflammatory comment, baseless often, just for the sake of thinking that’s good television I don’t think that’s good television.”
The prize for the winner of the show is also something that sets it apart. Rather than promising fame, the winner gets a scholarship worth $150,000 for the institution of their choice — in other words, more training. “The only way to have longevity and be able to sustain a career creatively and economically is hard work, nothing short of hard work,” he says. “The scholarship is also part of the nobility of the show. I don’t dangle a walk-on part on Broadway. I say, ‘Here, I’m going to help you become greater. I’m going to let you study anywhere in the world that you want to study, but I want you to come back to Canada, and I want Canadian audiences, and ultimately world audiences, to stand and cheer for just who you are.’”
Drabinsky has managed to coax some big names onto his jury, and the cream of the performing arts crop to be trainers of the chosen few selected from thousands of initial hopefuls. The jury (or marquee panel as it’s called) consists of Marvin Hamlisch, Cynthia Dale, Adrian Noble, Sergio Trujillo and, of course, Drabinksy.
Once the field is narrowed to 12 competitors, they will be housed in the National Ballet building and trained by elite coaches from institutions like Julliard, the Metropolitan Opera and the Royal Shakespeare Company. Even the acting coach for Brad Pitt and Hillary Swank has a turn with the competitors. “This (the training) represents the only way you can be great in the performing arts, not an ephemeral moment of instant stardom, whatever it is the other shows try to give. One moment you’re something and the next moment you’re serving coffee at Starbucks,” he says.
Our waitress engages in a few playful exchanges with the producer, still unsure, but opening up about her piano playing, singing and tap dancing. She has stage fright, though. It seems too perfect, but Drabinsky insists she’s not a plant. You just know a performer when you see one, he says.
There is no doubt that Drabinsky, though usually behind the stage or the camera, is a performer himself, travelling across Canada convincing skeptical journalists of his show’s merit. He does a pretty good job.
One thing is clear — this show represents a truly Canadian attitude towards how we should showcase and cultivate young performers and not, as Drabinsky puts it, “make a mockery of the talent.”
Cyber-store
Community Cloth gives indie designers their own online boutique
Initially published in FFWD October 11, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Fashion
At 25, David Robert is young, but certainly not lazy. A web designer by trade, Robert has spent a good 480 hours of his own time over the last year or so designing a website intended for, well, designers — the clothing variety.
Community Cloth is a new Calgary-based website that, once complete, will host pages for independent fashion designers in the United States and Canada. It is intended as a place where those interested in obscure designers can find unique pieces and buy them in a stylish cyber-atmosphere, and where those same independent designers can find clients and boutiques.
The idea was hatched when Robert was helping his mother on a project for the children’s clothing store she used to operate in Kensington. “I was working on a few things for her and noticed all of the designers that were supplying her store didn’t have very good sites,” he says. But it’s not just the kid’s designers that are lacking an online style.
“Some designers have MySpace pages or Facebook pages and if they want to sell their clothes, they sell them on ebay. It’s the worst process and it’s ugly.”
Since coming to the realization that there was an opening in the market, it took two years before Robert began to put his ideas into motion. “I woke up one day and had an idea for the branding of the site and for me that just starts everything, a visual motivator.”
Designers will have the opportunity to set up their own page on the site, complete with pictures and logos, links and customer ratings. There will be a store that sells all wares featured on the site that will have a unique advantage over other online shopping venues. Robert and his two compatriots are working on something called a fitting tool which, once complete, will allow shoppers to profile their body on the site and go shopping for items by fit — one innovation designed to bypass the obvious issues associated with shopping on a screen rather than in person.
“We haven’t made a working concept, it’s just calculations and mock-ups, but essentially you would be able to create, without a tape measure, your body’s profile. Then what you can do, if you’re searching for a pair of jeans, because jeans are impossible to fit, you would be able to search for jeans that fit you instead of searching for jeans that are low-rise, 32, boot-cut,” he says.
A second concept that will be used to ensure a good shopping experience is sample material with stitching and button samples provided by each designer as a mark of their craftsmanship.
The first phase of the site will be up and running before the end of the month and will feature street fashion photos uploaded by guests on the site. There will be space for commentary on the styles either of individuals or designers clothing with the intent to create interest in the site and independent fashion. “What we’re launching this fall is basically editorial and user-contributed articles and user-contributed street fashion photos,” says Robert.
Currently the site has a stable of 30 interested designers, nine of which are from Calgary. The target, however, is 500 by the time the site is fully functional, something Robert thinks is doable. “Every time we get in touch with a designer, they’re excited about it because there’s nothing out there right now,” he says.
The site has already hosted one street fashion show on an underpass walkway downtown, and may be hosting a Plus-15 show in February if all goes according to plan. With a site dedicated to independent designers, the hope is that Calgary’s fashion scene will continue to expand. “Personally, I’m really concentrating on Calgary and trying to work with what’s around right now,” says Robert. “Calgary’s fashion scene is growing really fast.”
Initially published in FFWD October 11, 2007 by Drew Anderson in Fashion
At 25, David Robert is young, but certainly not lazy. A web designer by trade, Robert has spent a good 480 hours of his own time over the last year or so designing a website intended for, well, designers — the clothing variety.
Community Cloth is a new Calgary-based website that, once complete, will host pages for independent fashion designers in the United States and Canada. It is intended as a place where those interested in obscure designers can find unique pieces and buy them in a stylish cyber-atmosphere, and where those same independent designers can find clients and boutiques.
The idea was hatched when Robert was helping his mother on a project for the children’s clothing store she used to operate in Kensington. “I was working on a few things for her and noticed all of the designers that were supplying her store didn’t have very good sites,” he says. But it’s not just the kid’s designers that are lacking an online style.
“Some designers have MySpace pages or Facebook pages and if they want to sell their clothes, they sell them on ebay. It’s the worst process and it’s ugly.”
Since coming to the realization that there was an opening in the market, it took two years before Robert began to put his ideas into motion. “I woke up one day and had an idea for the branding of the site and for me that just starts everything, a visual motivator.”
Designers will have the opportunity to set up their own page on the site, complete with pictures and logos, links and customer ratings. There will be a store that sells all wares featured on the site that will have a unique advantage over other online shopping venues. Robert and his two compatriots are working on something called a fitting tool which, once complete, will allow shoppers to profile their body on the site and go shopping for items by fit — one innovation designed to bypass the obvious issues associated with shopping on a screen rather than in person.
“We haven’t made a working concept, it’s just calculations and mock-ups, but essentially you would be able to create, without a tape measure, your body’s profile. Then what you can do, if you’re searching for a pair of jeans, because jeans are impossible to fit, you would be able to search for jeans that fit you instead of searching for jeans that are low-rise, 32, boot-cut,” he says.
A second concept that will be used to ensure a good shopping experience is sample material with stitching and button samples provided by each designer as a mark of their craftsmanship.
The first phase of the site will be up and running before the end of the month and will feature street fashion photos uploaded by guests on the site. There will be space for commentary on the styles either of individuals or designers clothing with the intent to create interest in the site and independent fashion. “What we’re launching this fall is basically editorial and user-contributed articles and user-contributed street fashion photos,” says Robert.
Currently the site has a stable of 30 interested designers, nine of which are from Calgary. The target, however, is 500 by the time the site is fully functional, something Robert thinks is doable. “Every time we get in touch with a designer, they’re excited about it because there’s nothing out there right now,” he says.
The site has already hosted one street fashion show on an underpass walkway downtown, and may be hosting a Plus-15 show in February if all goes according to plan. With a site dedicated to independent designers, the hope is that Calgary’s fashion scene will continue to expand. “Personally, I’m really concentrating on Calgary and trying to work with what’s around right now,” says Robert. “Calgary’s fashion scene is growing really fast.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)