Donna McLaughlin recently returned from a chicken training seminar in Baltimore, Md., where she learned skills to help with her work as a local dog and horse trainer. Herald photo by Ian Martens

By Student on August 8, 2014.

Melissa Villeneuve

FOR THE HERALD

The recently released South Saskatchewan Regional Plan (SSRP) is a “big missed opportunity to create more meaningful protection” for regional landscapes, according to conservation specialist Brittany Verbeek of the Alberta Wilderness Association (AWA).

“We were pretty disappointed actually in the final plan,” said Verbeek.

After five years of contributing suggestions to the SSRP, the AWA supported the process from the start and many members attended the consultation sessions. “We always advocate for public consultation in these important land-use plans and processes,” she said. “The biggest thing is that it was great that they did it, but we felt that they didn’t really listen to Albertans.”

Verbeek said it was good to see some of the Castle wilderness become Wildland Park, but only about half of it (546 square kilometres) was included and they were hoping to see it preserved in its entirety.

“We felt like it was a small step forward. Many of those really important lower valleys and foothills areas that are critical habitat areas for a lot of our species at risk, and also just for general biodiversity and headwaters protection, weren’t included in the park.”

Also missing from the plan was legislated protection in the grasslands area.

“That’s one of the areas in the southern region that is so important because eighty per cent of our species at risk are in those grasslands,” Verbeek explained. “We really need to see a rollback from industry and from the conversion of native grasslands to agriculture in those areas. We’re losing a lot of species and there is a lot at risk.”

Verbeek said when the Regional Advisory Council recommended conservation areas on public lands in the Milk River and Wild Horse Plains, the SSRP recognized those areas as important yet didn’t put any protection on them.

“They could have taken that step further and actually designated those areas as parks or heritage rangeland, and continued to have sustainable grazing, but pull back industry off them. That’s what we were hoping to see,” Verbeek said.

She said the SSRP has taken good steps forward in terms of looking at the landscape as a whole and the cumulative effects on certain areas. While she acknowledges that there are several subplans in the works that will pinpoint some specific areas, she is frustrated those plans are delayed.

“For example, the biodiversity management framework is a really important (subplan) for ecological integrity and it is still waiting to be released, I think by the end of 2015. They’re also talking about creating a trails management and framework plan,” said Verbeek. “Those plans are really important and they need to be developed and implemented as soon as possible. Conservation is still on hold while industry and development continues.”

Shannon Frank, executive director of the Oldman Watershed Council (OWC), agrees that it is important to get these subplans into place quickly, and she understands it’s difficult for people to be patient.

“Most of what’s in (the SSRP) is still promises, saying this will happen by this date, which is good to see deadlines and I think it shows commitment that it actually will get implemented and it’s not just going to sit on a shelf,” said Frank.

“It’s always difficult to be patient and wait for things to happen on the ground when you see nothing happening. I can share the pain. It takes time to sort out what is scientifically valid and what is (or isn’t) supported by the community and how far do you go to protect something. Even our communities are not all on the same page. It’s a difficult task.”

Overall, Frank is happy the SSRP exists and says it’s important to remember that regional planning is new to our province. She said it’s a good step toward managing large landscapes and the cumulative effects of all types of use, and she encourages people to continue to participate in the government consultations.

“The first thing to do is set some goals and targets. We need to let the government know what we expect the limits to be or not to be and what we want to see on the ground. I do feel they are trying to listen and it’s just a really difficult, long process and not everyone is going to be happy.”

Globe editorial

The Globe and Mail

Published Thursday, Aug. 07 2014, 7:00 PM EDT

Last updated Thursday, Aug. 07 2014, 7:03 PM EDT

“The aura of power” is a surprisingly poetic phrase for a provincial auditor-general’s report, but the elusiveness of who decided to spend what, in the premier’s office when Alison Redford was premier of Alberta, justifies that explanation of abuses, from Merwan Saher, the auditor-general.

Prime ministers and premiers cannot reasonably be expected to be their own bookkeepers, but one of the purposes of their having staffers at all is to protect first ministers from committing follies of a kind that were evidently rife in Ms. Redford’s rather short premiership. Instead, much of her staff seemed to participate in her hapless inability to draw distinctions among genuine government business, partisan politics and personal life.

More Related to this Story

• Six key findings of Auditor General report into Redford’s expenses
• Related Ex-premier Redford used public money ‘inappropriately,’ auditor general reports
• Earlier Ex-premier Redford resigns as Alberta MLA

Watch

Video: Redford right to step down, Alberta PC contenders say

Watch

Video: Alison Redford resigns as Calgary-Elbow MLA

The rumour mill, by contrast, seemed to be well attuned to such distinctions. For example, the previously reported “ghost” bookings for seats on government aircraft, seemingly intended to give more space to Ms. Redford and her inner circle on plane trips, turns out to have been a real practice. No one has admitted to originating this idea, and the former premier and her former chief of staff maintain that they knew nothing about this “block booking.” They were apparently content to inhabit a bubble.

Much of Ms. Redford’s political misfortune was rooted in her victory in the party leadership election of 2011. The Progressive Conservatives opened up the election to any and all Albertans, whether or not they had previously been party members. Many who voted for Ms. Redford were not small-c conservatives at all.

As a result, when she became premier, she had little rapport or affinity with much of her own caucus. To many of the Conservative MLAs, she seemed distant and arrogant. Her international travels, and the private suite being constructed in a government building, did not help.

There are now signs of an overreaction. Premier David Hancock is talking about referring Mr. Saher’s report to the RCMP. But the report says nothing about fraud or any other kind of crime.

Mr. Saher is too sensible for that. Instead, he rightly deplores the lack of measures to prevent high-ranking public servants from their own “bad judgment,” and the reluctance to challenge dubious decisions in the premier’s office. Evidently the “aura of power” took on a life of its own.

Follow us on Twitter: @GlobeDebate

A company may apply for Right of Entry when a landowner refuses to permit a company to enter his or her lands for pipeline-related purposes. Pipeline companies often claim the only remaining issue to settle is compensation, however this is not usually the case (e.g. in the Enbridge Cromer situation below). The company asks the National Energy Board (NEB) to consider granting an order to allow the company to be able to enter the lands without the landowner’s consent. This is an order which grants the company an immediate right to enter the property to which the order applies.

CAEPLA believes that landowners should have the right to say NO to a bad easement, a bad deal, and the right to negotiate a good business agreement that protects their property.

Enbridge Falls Short of Pledge

August 5, 2014

By Bob Weber, The Canadian Press

EDMONTON – The Alberta government has refused to release documents on its decisions about who gets to speak at public hearings on energy development.

The issue of public input has generated increasing concern and at least one court case.

The Canadian Press filed a freedom-of-information request nine months ago seeking paperwork on the eligibility of groups or individuals to address Alberta Energy Regulator hearings. The request yielded 260 pages of correspondence, reports and briefing notes. Every page was blank.

“A package consisting of 260 pages with no disclosure” is how Alberta Environment’s freedom-of-information office described the release in a letter received by the news agency last week.

The request was made after a Queen’s Bench judge ruled in late 2013 that the department wrongly refused to grant an environmental coalition the right to appear at a hearing into a proposed oilsands development. The judge concluded that documents from a disclosure hearing suggested the group was shut out because of its critical stance on the oilsands.

Since that ruling, environmental groups and First Nations have been denied standing to speak at public hearings at least nine times. In one case, hearings on a proposed oilsands expansion were cancelled after six groups that had asked to speak were turned down.

The issue has spread beyond energy regulation. On June 25, the office of the province’s consumer advocate was turned down after it asked to address an Alberta Utilities Commission hearing into alleged electricity price manipulation.

That same month, two aboriginal bands took the government to court after they were refused standing at Alberta Energy Regulator hearings.

Legal experts have voiced public concerns about what they call a restriction on public input. The judge in the case that brought the issue to light urged the government to draw its circle of consultation as wide as possible.

Alberta Environment says the rules haven’t changed, even though many of those shut out had previously been routinely granted the right to address hearing panels.

Wade Clark, director of policy and regulatory alignment for both Alberta Environment and Alberta Energy, said all documents were kept secret because they could reveal how legislation creating the new energy regulator was developed.

“What I’m referring to there are the various drafts of the legislation,” he said. “That’s the type of thing that’s routinely not disclosed.

“As I interpreted the request, it related more to the deliberations during that time frame, which related to the (new) regulations and rules.”

No officials during the time the request was under consideration suggested that interpretation to The Canadian Press. No attempt was made to clarify the request, although the news agency contacted the government numerous times to check its progress.

Clark suggested the ruling could be reconsidered.

“I think we could sit down and work out the wording (of the question).”

Rachel Notley, environment critic for the New Democrats, said the difficulty in getting information on how important decisions are made is typical of the governing Tories.

“Only in Conservative Alberta would a public body, tasked with consulting the public, in public, keep its rules around how to do that secret,” she said.

By Lethbridge Herald Opinon on July 26, 2014.

Heather Forsyth

Wildrose Health Critic

MLA Calgary-Fish Creek

The Public Interest Commissioner revealed this past week that a senior Alberta Health Services (AHS) executive failed to disclose a direct conflict of interest in a $75,000 sole-source consulting contract.

In particular, this executive was the former partner and shareholder with the corporation that received this contract.

The Commissioner’s report began last January after my Wildrose colleague Kerry Towle wrote a letter to the Public Interest Commissioner’s office to investigate allegations of Alberta Health Services warehousing $11 million worth of computers.

Sadly, mishandling the deployment of $11 million in computers and handing out sole-source contracts that benefit AHS executives cannot be described as a wrongdoing under current legislation passed by the PC government.

It is further proof of what we have said about this government for a long time, their legislation is designed to protect the interests of government and not taxpayers.

Taxpayers also deserve to know why conflicts of interest for senior executives are not publicly disclosed and how this type of incident happened in the first place.

Every day, I hear from patients frustrated about being stuck in growing wait lines in emergency rooms and for key surgeries. I hear from front-line health-care workers who work day and night to hold our health-care system together, frustrated with the highly centralized leadership in our health-care system. And I hear from ordinary Albertans asking me why we keep reading stories of abuse of tax dollars in our health-care system, yet the government refuses to make the changes that need to be made to the system.

It all makes you give your head a shake.

But we know this is not the first time AHS has been caught handing out lucrative sole-source contracts, the practice is well established. Just last April, we released information showing AHS spent almost $1 billion on sole-source contracts between 2011 and 2013. That is 1,275 contracts that faced zero competitive bidding to ensure Alberta’s health-care system is getting best value for taxpayer dollars.

Remember, every dollar not saved in our health-care system, means less money that can go to hiring doctors and nurses or putting a stop to increasing wait times.

The question needs to be asked and answered why these contracts are being handed out to special friends of executives instead of being spent on the businesses that will provide best value for Alberta taxpayers.

Unfortunately, it is unlikely we will get the answers and the solutions we need from the current government.

Albertans can be assured the Wildrose will look to strengthening government legislation to crack down on this type of mishandling of taxpayer dollars.

We will work to end the ongoing abuse of sole-source contracting throughout the entire Alberta government.

Finally, Albertans can be assured that a Wildrose government will work to improve our health-care system, fix wait times and restore local decision making.

We owe it not only to taxpayers, but to our health-care workers and patients who rely on our entire health-care system.