The Biggest Losers

In the race to be the guy to replace Ralph. Lyle Oberg and Mark Norris.


FINAL RESULTS (courtesy The Invisble Hand)
11:45pm:
Dinning 29,470 (30.2%)
Morton 25,614 (26.2%)
Stelmach 14,967 (15.3%)
Oberg 11,638 (11.9%)
Hancock 7,595 (7.8%)
Norris 6,789 (6.9%)
Doerksen 873 (0.9%)
McPherson 744 (0.8%)
Total: 97,690



Lyle Oberg ran the race with all the self assured bravado of being in second place. That bravedo and confidence was a case of believing his own press.Unfortunately through out this campaign Oberg created nothing but bad press and on Saturday night the reality of that came through loud and clear.

As I write this, Lyle Oberg has finished fourth, and is off the final ballot. He was ashen, looking like a 10-year-old who has just discovered his bike was stolen. Edmonton Journal Legislature Reporter Graham Thompson

And all those PC memberships that the Building Trades bought for their membership to support Oberg added to his self delusion. And in the end made little difference as I predicted.

Mark Norris had lost his seat last provincial election not a great place to run from, especially when he had been a cabinet minister. And despite rallying the Edmonton Conservative business community, with constant propagandizing from his biggest cheerleader the Edmonton Sun, he actually came in behind the only Red Tory in the race, his fellow Edmontonian David Hancock. Like Oberg he believed his own press.

That makes Oberg and Norris the biggest losers.

While Stelmach came in third his numbers are so low he is neither a king maker nor a spoiler. He is however a rich widow that the two princes left in this race will come courting.Edmonton Journal Legislature Reporter Graham Thompson agrees with my initial assessment of Stelmach.

Some of the biggest cheers of the night came from Ed Stelmach's supporters, who were overjoyed their guy finished third and is on the second ballot. But third place is the booby prize. It's hard to imagine Stelmach bouncing back when he's so far behind.

But as usual with the Tories, some continue to live in their own fantasy worlds. Like Oberg and Norris did. Stelmach thinks he stands a chance on the third ballot, despite it obviously being a two way race between two conflicting ideologies in the party.Stelmach not quitting

Stelmach is no Third Way. And he should bow out gracefully.And for the good of the party endorse Dinning. Though frankly I have never been one to give one hoot for the good of the Party of Calgary. But that is the realpolitick that faces Stelmach and the other losers.

With a Morton win the old Reform party will consoldiate its rule in Edmonton and Ottawa. And woe to the party and Canada. If that happens, until the next provincial election, the other big losers will be you and I.

Morton's strong second-place showing could be seen as surprising for a rookie MLA who's never held a cabinet post and was only elected in 2004.However, the former senator-in-waiting has been thumping the war drums against the federal government for years on several fronts, and had deep roots to the former Reform and Canadian Alliance parties.He's also backed by many Alberta Tory MPs and has been using his network of supporters to build a political machine many analysts believe is only surpassed in size by Dinning's.

Though I personally believe it would be the best thing. A Morton led PC Party will be fractious and split, interncine power struggles between the progressives and the social conservatives will ensue. Causing Progressive Conservatives, liberals, centerists and Red Tories to abandon the party for the Alberta Liberals, their natural home. And with Taft purging the party of one if its most Red Liberals the outspoken trade unionist, Dan Black, he is preparing a home for them.

Peter Lougheed created the PC's as a popular front party of Liberals, Progressive Conservatives and the old Socreds. The later have morphed over the years into seperatists like the old Western Canada Concept, Republicans, Federal Reformers, social conservatives and fundamentalists. With Morton in charge it would be the final death of the last lingerings of the Lougheed era political party. Which is why he endorsed Dinning.

See:

Conservative Leadership Race

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Alberta, Dinning, Klein, PC, Calgary, PartyofCalgary, politics, leadership, Liberals, Conservatives, corporations, OnePartyState, Lougheed, Klein, Oil, Planning, History, Politics, Economics, Oberg, Doerksen, Morton, leadership, politics, PC, Tory, leadership-race,

Libertarian Justice

Our New Law and Order Government proposes to have police appoint judges, calls for mandatory sentencing, three strike laws, and the whole raft of authoritarian solutions to 'crime' . What they have missed doing is to actually reform the real failure in our so called 'justice' system. That failure is the lack of a genuine jury system.

Like most judicial systems Canada's has little to do with real justice because it is all about state sanctioned law. It lacks the very basis of libertarian justice; the jury system.

Rarely are court cases in Canada heard by a jury. The prosecution can opt for a Judge in many cases of minor to serious crimes. And even in cases of very serious crimes, assualt, murder, etc. a jury is optional. It is NOT a given. It is an option. And thus it's power and relevance remains diminished in Canada, even more so than in the United States.

Yet for real justice to be done, the jury system is key to a libertarian approach to law. Ironic that those who laughingly call themselves libertarians like the Harpocrites quickly abandon any such pretext once they achieve state power. Then like Tories of old England they return to their reactionary artistocratic roots; law and order, God, Queen and Country.

They of course are really speaking of liberaltarianism, that species of false or vulgar libertarianism that is commonly called fiscal conservativism, neo-conservativism or neo-liberalism. When it comes to justice and morality they are not classical liberals nor libertarians but Burkean Reactionaries at best and fundamentalist Christians at worse. They fear anarchy and embrace law, order and good government.

The very beginings of Anarchism lay in the liberal utilitarian belief in self government and self reliance.It is about poltical justice. And as the author of that treatise William Godwin asserted it is about contractual relations between people. No contract is valid if it is not voluntary and freely entered into. This is the basis of anarchism and American libertarianism.

Punishment inevitably excites in the sufferer, and ought to excite, a sense of injustice. Let its purpose be, to convince me of the truth of a position which I at present believe to be false. It is not, abstractedly considered, of the nature of an argument, and therefore it cannot begin with producing conviction. Punishment is a comparatively specious name; but is in reality nothing more than force put upon one being by another who happens to be stronger. But strength apparently does not constitute justice. The case of punishment, in the view in which we now consider it, is the case of you and me differing in opinion, and your telling me that you must be right, since you have a more brawny arm, or have applied your mind more to the acquiring skill in your weapons than I have. OF THE RIGHT OF PRIVATE JUDGMENT

An excellent essay on Libertarianism and the Jury system; The Jury: Defender Or Oppressor outlines the ideals of American libertarians Lysander Spooner and Benjamin Tucker. See the excerpt below.

Key to Spooners idea of justice was the fact that no Constitution or law could be accepted except by the people, because it is the people who make the laws. And Spooner viewed the real Jury system as not one appointed by the State but made up by the people themselves.

Our constitutions purport to be established by 'the people,' and, in theory, 'all the people' consent to such government as the constitutions authorize. But this consent of 'the people' exists only in theory. It has no existence in fact. Government is in reality established by the few; and these few assume the consent of all the rest, without any such consent being actually given.

Interestingly this was similar to the position of the great Canadian liberal Papineau in his critique of the Act of Confederation. In light of todays controversy over what is the Canadian Nation State one should remember that the people of Canada never had any say in either Confederation or the repatriation of the Constitution. Just as we have no say in the courts.

In fact on those occasions when the people attempted to have a say in their own government, the Rebellion of 1837 and again with the Riel Rebellion, the Canadian Law and Order State of the day ruthlessly put down the rebellions. And in the case of Riel he was tried and found guilty by a Judge. A jury of his peers would have declared him a free man.

Why shouldn't every law be subject to review by the citizens? When authority springs from the people, why shouldn't it also return to them through a system of of citizen enforcement of the laws? Why shouldn't citizens have a practical, direct, effective way of defending their freedoms and property and that of their neighbors from any undue invasion of the state?

Juries by no means are a prerequisite to a libertarian judicial system, but they are practical and they can work. They've proven that. They have the added advantage of a wide-spread popularity among a broad base of people. It's only a matter of degree to take people from understanding better the concepts behind the jury's right to determine law and fact, to help them to understand other elements of libertarian philosophy. the jury can help bridge the enormous abyss between the current statist society and a future libertarian society. One of the advantages a properly organized jury offers, no matter when or where it exists is that it has its own built-in safeguards which protect it from the kinds of pressure and decay that have affected all government judicial systems. These internal mechanisms which make juries immune from this rot include: jury does not establish precedent because every case is different and must rest on its own merits

A jury's powers are limited

The requirement that all verdicts be unanimous protects minorities from the abuse of majorities

A jury does not need to be subservient to the legal community or to other minions of the state

A jury has no vested power interests to protect

A jury views justice from a layman's perspective

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Bemjamin Tucker, Liberty, Lysander Spooner, Godwin, Jury, Constitution, law, libertarian, anarchism, invdidualist-anarchist, Proudhon, mutualist, mutualism, anarchist-law, jury, Canada, Conservatives, Harper, Toews, government, Papineau, Riel, 1837, judge, judicial-reform, three-strikes, police

The Era Of The Common Man

I came across an interesting post on the decade of Jacksonian Democracy in America. Ten short years of real liberty in America. The era of the common man.

With reference to the founder of the Workingmans Party, George Henry Evans. Once again showing the link between libertarianism and communism.

Evans promoted the The Free-Soil Movement he opposed land monopoly (as did Proudhon) and he opposed slavery . Evans would help found the new Republican party, the party of Lincoln not Bush. As a mechanic and workingman of his time, like many of the plebians in America, he promoted the ideals of the of the American Revolution, with his declaration of the workingmans Independence.

Jacksonian Democracy 1830-1840

Jacksonian democrats believed that they were guardians of the Constitution. Thy believed that they upheld its principles, and defended its ideals of an "equal" society. They took the Constitution at its face value, without reading into it. Jacksonians believed that they defended political democracy. They supported a government that represented all of its people, not just the wealthy. In their minds, it was important that all white men have the right to vote, not just the rich white men. They believed that they protected individual liberty. Locke's natural rights were held in high esteem. Government should ensure these rights, they thought. They believed that they propagated economic opportunity. Upward mobility was what the land of opportunity was known for, and they believed that was one of the better aspects of America, and should be preserved at all costs.

Jacksonians did a good job of upholding these ideals. In July of 1830, an act regarding the Bank of the United States was submitted to President Jackson for signature, he flatly vetoed it on the grounds that it was not "compatible with justice...or with the Constitution" of the United States. He believed that it was unconstitutional for a single financial institution to enjoy "a monopoly of the foreign and domestic exchange." Committed to the ideal of expanding the country, he worked hard to acquire territory to hold the expanding population. Political democracy blossomed under Jacksonian democracy.

George Henry Evans, a Jacksonian Democrat, in December 1829 wrote "The Working Man's Declaration of Independence." He borrowed some of Jefferson's words to construct a document that looks strikingly like Marx's manifesto. He wrote that when one government perpetrates "a long train of abuses" it is the right and duty of the people to use "every constitutional means to reform...such a government." This is the character of Jacksonian democracy.

The Working Men's Declaration of Independence

Written in 1829 by George H. Evans (1805-56), this document appeared in the Working Man's Advocate of New York and the Mechanic's Free Press of Philadelphia. Evans helped found the Working Man's Party in New York City during 1829. He a lso published several labor papers, including the weekly Working Man's Advocate.

"When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary" for one class of a community to assert their natural and unalienable rights in opposition to other classes of their fellow men, "and to assume among" them a political "station of equality to w hich the laws of nature and of nature's God," as well as the principles of their political compact "entitle them; a decent respect to the opinions of mankind," and the more paramount duty they owe to their own fellow citizens, "requires that they should d eclare the causes which impel them" to adopt so painful, yet so necessary, a measure.

"We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights" aga inst the undue influence of other classes of society, prudence, as well as the claims of self defence, dictates the necessity of the organization of a party, who shall, by their representatives, prevent dangerous combinations to subvert these indefeasible and fundamental privileges. "All experience hath shown, that mankind" in general, and we as a class in particular, "are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves," by an opposition which the pride and self interest of unprincipled political aspirants, with more unprincipled zeal or religious bigotry, will willfully misrepresent. "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations" take place, all invariably tending to the oppression and degradation of one class of society , and to the unnatural and iniquitous exaltation of another by political leaders, "it is their right it is their due ' to use every constitutional means to reform the abuses of such a government and to provide new guards for their future security. The his tory of the political parties in this state, is a history of political iniquities, all tending to the enacting and enforcing oppressive and unequal laws. To prove this, let facts be submitted to the candid and impartial of our fellow citizens of all parti es.

1. The laws for levying taxes are all based on erroneous principles, in consequence of their operating most oppressively on one of society, and being scarcely felt by the other.
2. The laws regarding the duties of jurors, witnesses, and militia trainings, are still more unequal and oppressive.
3. The laws for private incorporations are all partial in their operations; favoring one class of society to the expense of the other, who have no equal participation.
4. The laws incorporating religious societies have a pernicious tendency, by promoting the erection of magnificent places of public worship, by the rich, excluding others, and which others cannot imitate; consequently engendering spiritual pride in the c lergy and people, and thereby creating odious distinctions in society, destructive to its social peace and happiness.
5. The laws establishing and patronizing seminaries of learning are unequal, favoring the rich, and perpetuating imparity, which natural causes have produced, and which judicious laws ought, and can, remedy.
6. The laws and municipal ordinances and regulations, generally, besides those specially enumerated, have heretofore been ordained on such principles, as have deprived nine tenths of the members of the body politic, who are not wealthy, of the equal means to enjoy "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" which the rich enjoy exclusively; but the federative compact intended to secure to all, indiscriminately. The lien law in favor of landlords against tenants, and all othe r honest creditors, is one illustration among innumerable others which can be adduced to prove the truth of these allegations.

We have trusted to the influence of the justice and good sense of our political leaders, to prevent the continuance of these abuses, which destroy the natural bands of equality so essential to the attainment of moral happiness, "but they have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity."

Therefore, we, the working class of society, of the city of New York, "appealing to the supreme judge of the world," and to the reason, and consciences of the impartial of all parties, "for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the spirit, a nd by the authority of that political liberty which has been promised to us equally with our fellow men, solemnly publish and declare, and invite all under like pecuniary circumstances, together with every liberal mind, to join us in the declaration, "tha t we are, & of right ought to be," entitled to equal means to obtain equal moral happiness, and social enjoyment, and that all lawful and constitutional measures ought to be adopted to the attainment of those objects. "And for the support of this declarat ion, we mutually pledge to each other" our faithful aid to the end of our lives.

George Henry Evans & The Origins Of American Individualist-Anarchism

Our refuge is upon the soil, in all its freshness and fertility - our heritage is on the Public Domain, in all its boundless wealth and infinite variety. This heritage once secured to us, the evil we complain of will become our greatest good. Machinery from the formidable rival, will sink into the obedient instrument of our will - the master shall become our servant - the tyrant shall become our slave.
- George Henry Evans, Workingman's Advocate, July 6, 1844

George Henry Evans was born on March 25, 1805 in rural Herefordshire, England and came to central New York with his family as a child. (His older brother, Frederick W. Evans, later became one of the leaders of the Shakers.³) After having spent much of his youth apprenticed to a printer in Ithica, he moved to New York City in 1829 and immediately jumped into the radical labor movement, helping to found the New York Workingman's Party and editing the organization's journal, The Working Man's Advocate. He became an enthusiastic admirer of Robert Dale Owen, who had also just recently arrived in New York from his father's abortive activities in the Midwest. While Evans continued to provide space in The Working Man's Advocate to such radical causes as the communism of Thomas Skidmore and the "public" (i.e., State financed and regulated) education schemes of Robert Dale Owen, once the Working Man's Party collapsed, these other ideas were swept to the wayside by Evan's proposals.

Perhaps one of the reasons for the attraction of Owen to Evans was their mutual rejection of religion, for the areas of disagreement between Evans' Working Man's Advocate and Owen's periodical, The Free Enquirer were relatively few (in terms of religion). Under Evans' hand, The Working Man's Advocate was a journal of both land reform and free-thought. Evans was a Painite radical who dabbled with atheism and used the pages of the journal and the office of the paper to publish, advertise and sell free-thought works such as Palmer's Principles of Nature, Kneeland's Evidences of Christianity, Voltaire's Philosophical Dictionary, Paine, Shelley, Volney and, of course, d'Holbach, the father of atheism. Free-thought bookstores were advertised in The Working Man's Advocate and Evans' later periodicals, The Man, Young America, The Radical and the others. He was also a supporter and participant of the annual Paine Birthday Celebrations within the radical community in New York and reported the proceedings in The Working Man's Advocate.

By the early 1830s, the Working Men's Parties had collapsed into a plethora of schismatic groups. Evans' association with many of the former "Workies" continued, although moving into other areas. Evans remained enthusiastic in his support for various radical Painite causes. In 1834, he became the vice-president of the Working Men Opposed to Paper Money, rejecting the calls for an inflationary money supply ("Rag Money System" as it was denounced by the Painites both in England and in America) and supporting a hard gold policy. Many of his associates, including John Windt, became active in the Loco Focos, the radical free-trade wing of the New York Democratic Party.

One of the constant concerns of Evans throughout his adult life was that of Indian rights. As he said in the November 1841 issue of The Radical:

The Government of the United States is, and has been for years, bringing indelible disgrace upon itself by its most iniquitous and merciless treatment of the Indian tribes; and for what? To possess itself of their lands, not for the use of its own people, for they have millions upon millions of acres yet uncultivated and untouched, but to be held for the benefit of speculators! Yes, the republican government of the United States is lavishing the blood and treasure of its own citizens, and hunting and destroying the Indians with worse than savage ferocity, because they will not consent to sell their birth-right for a mess of pottage; because they will not abandon the homes of their childhood, the graves of their fathers, to strangers! In history, in our own history, this cruel treatment of the Indians will be classed with the unsurpassed exterminating persecutions of the aborigines of Hispaniola by Columbus and his followers. What will be said of us in Indian tradition should any Indians be spared to tell their tale?

Of late years fraud appears indelibly stamped upon all our transactions with them. Treaties have been made with a few bribed chiefs, not authorized by their tribes, and then enforcing the stipulation at the point of the bayonet. Thus have the Cherokees and Seminoles been treated. The present war with the latter is a war of aggression on the part of the United States, evidently with the view of acquiring territory, without the shadow of reason or justice to support it.⁴

This brings us to the issue that concerned George Henry Evans for the bulk of his adult life: Land Reform.

See

A NEW AMERICAN REVOLUTION

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
anarchism, socialism, libertarian, left-libertarian, individualist-anarchism, George, Evans, Jackson, Jacksonian, America, government, working-class, free-land, workingmans-declaration-of-independence, Benjamin, Tucker, Workingmans-Party, abolistionists, Republican-Party, Jacksonian-Democracy, Lincoln, , common-man, Greeley,

Sunday Funnies

Second Ballot

It's going to be a second ballot run for the man who will replace Ralph. It's between Dinning and Morton.Alberta Tory leadership bid a two-horse race

CALGARY/AM770CHQR - Alberta Tory Leadership Results (10:30 p.m.)

Jim Dinning 26,115
Ted Morton 21,507
Ed Stelmach 12,019

130/179 polls reporting

Second Ballot Required in PC Race

The other five contenders have dropped off the ballot, including Lyle Oberg, whose campaigned was dogged with missteps. The jockeying has already begun among the first ballot losers and former cabinet minister Dave Hancock -- who finished fifth -- has thrown his support behind Stelmach.

Now the cheerleaders at the Edmonton Sun can quit promoting Norris, he wasn't even in the running. He never was except in the minds of the Edmonton Sun editorialists.

And if Smilin' Ed Stelmach is really a 'centerist' he had best throw his support behind Dinning or the next Premier of Alberta will be a Seperatist.

Earlier in the week, Mark Norris told The Journal's editorial board that he Stelmach and Hancock had an agreement to support each other on a second ballot. Hancock, it seems, has fulfilled that promise. But Norris was less certain.Though Hancock’s endorsement looks good for Stelmach, his support may not mean much, as his voters won’t necessarily come with him. In the last Tory leadership race in 1992, all the losing candidates jumped to Nancy Betkowski’s campaign, but she was still routed by Ralph Klein the following week.

Hmmm maybe that's why Harper recognized the Quebecois as a nation, laying the groundwork for his pal Morton.

Vote: the only commodity that is peddleable without a license.
- More Maxims of Mark Twain

See:

Conservative Leadership Race

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Alberta, Dinning, Klein, PC, Calgary, PartyofCalgary, politics, leadership, Liberals, Conservatives, corporations, OnePartyState, Lougheed, Klein, Oil, Planning, History, Politics, Economics, Oberg, Doerksen, Morton, leadership, politics, PC, Tory, leadership-race,

Flaherty Disappoints

Currency traders. Yoiks. Flaherty long on rhetoric; short on substance
All in all we were disappointed that there was not more immediate direct tax saving benefits to investors and corporations however, as they say, the devil is in the details and we will have to wait until February for those.

See Flaherty


Tags Government,Canada, economics, budget, Flaherty, Government, parliament, Finance Minister, net debt, pension, debt

Pinochet Admits He Did It.

This still does not let the United States and the CIA off the hook. And Pinochet made no apology. Nor did he take personal responsibility for ordering the assassination of Salvador Allende.

In fact he was unrepentant saying he did it for the good of the country.

Gen. Augusto Pinochet took full responsibility for the first time Saturday for the actions of his 1973-90 dictatorship, which carried out thousands of political killings and is blamed for widespread torture and illegal imprisonment.

According to an official report, 3,197 people were killed for political reasons under Pinochet, including more than 1,000 who were made to disappear. Thousands more were illegally imprisoned, tortured or forced into exile.

Pinochet is currently under indictment in two human rights abuse cases and for tax evasion, and has scores of others criminal suits pending, filed by victims of abuses or their relatives. Until now, the courts have dropped the charges against him citing his poor health.

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Pinochet, Chile, USA, CIA, Allende, coup, human-rights, murder, torture,

Drunk Holds Court

King Ralph is officially 'off the wagon'.

See:

Ralph Klein

King Ralph

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Ralph Klein, Klein, Alberta, drunk, premier, St.Louis Hotel

What About Mexican Human Rights Mr. Harper

Stephen Harper made a big issue last week about Human Rights in China. Well next week on December 1 he will be in Mexico to give recognition to the phony government of Felipe Calderón.

That election is still contested by the 'other' democratically elected president of Mexico; Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador and in communities across Mexico, including the city of Oaxaca. Oaxaca has seen mass demonstrations against the corrupt governor, where an American journalist Brad Will was killed by Federal forces, and where people have been disappeared.

Will Harper speak out about the human rights abuses of the Fox/Calderón cabal? Why do I think not.

BTL:Mexican Government Fears Spread of Oaxaca Civil Society

As the movement of teachers, students, workers and indigenous groups marked six months of continuous protest in the Mexican city of Oaxaca, violence again erupted in the streets on Nov. 20, the day Mexicans celebrated the 96th anniversary of their nation's 1910 revolution. Running battles between the Federal Preventative Police -- firing tear gas and activists armed with sticks, slingshots and fireworks -- resulted in dozens of injuries and arrests.

Protests began in May, when teachers went out on strike demanding a pay increase and books for students. Oaxaca's Gov. Ulises Ruiz ordered police to attack the teachers and their supporters. That confrontation galvanized the teachers, sparked a civil society uprising and the formation of The People's Popular Assembly of Oaxaca or APPO, which demanded the removal of Gov. Ruiz, who many accuse of winning office by stealing the 2004 state election.

At the end of October, Mexican President Vicente Fox sent 4,000 federal troops to Oaxaca to remove protesters from the colonial city's central plaza, after more than a dozen people -- including Brad Will, an independent U.S. journalist -- had been killed by gunmen, whom protesters identify as undercover government agents.

UN expresses concern over Mexico police abuse

EU observer recommends second round for Mexico's presidential race

Mexico quietly exposes federal role in 'Dirty War'

Authorities in Oaxaca, Mexico deny reporting that US journalist shot at point blank range



See:

Dual Power In Mexico

Mexico



Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Mexico, Human-rights, police, murder, abuse, Calderon, Fox, Harper, Obrador, Oaxaca, Zapatistas, PM, Canada,

P3= Public Pension Partnerships

In Canada the biggest players in the P3 racket are public pension funds. Public sector workers pensions in fact. Both the Ontario Teachers Pension fund and OMERS are funds that are wanting to invest in privatization of public infrastructure. So perhaps we should call these P3's Public Pension Partnerships.

Is there a problem with this? Well yes there is because these funds are not controled by the workers who pay into them but by professional investment managers. In Canada private sector union pension funds also look to invest in infrastructure. This would not be problematic if the workers whose pensions make up these funds actually had control of the funds, hired the managers and set the mandate for investments. But they don't. Unions need to put pension fund reform on their agenda's

With direct control of these pension funds and their investments public sector workers could use it as leverage for for social equity, environmental stewardship, job security, living wages, etc. etc.

The myth of private sector partnerships with the state is just that a myth. What this is really is public sector funding of the state. And the irony is that the whole P3 racket was supposed to be about the private sector taking a risk with it's investments. It was part of the neo-con myth that the private sector is more efficient than the public. It was an attempt by them to reduce the public sector, to contract out public sector jobs. Now that same public sector with its pension funds and public sector workers that are being used to fund government infrastructure.

So is every Canadian. When CPP was privatized, to allow an arms length investment arm to be created we now have our federal pension plan engaging in P3's as well as other questionable investments such as in the Arms Industry and Wal-Mart.

Like union pension funds, Canadians need reform of the CPP to have citizen representatives including labour, women, environmental and consumer groups, on the board with ethical guidelines for investing.

The Harper Conservative Government push for P3's is not about free market economics (ain't no such a creature in capitalism) it is just good old fashioned conservative state capitalism.


P3 or not P3? Big pension funds hope for new infrastructure opportunities

TORONTO (CP) - Canada's major pension funds, after investing billions of dollars abroad in assets ranging from British waterworks to New Zealand timberland, are hopeful that a logjam holding back their flow of money into infrastructure within Canada is giving way.

The Ontario Teachers' Pension Plan is acquiring its first piece of Canadian infrastructure - the dominant freight container terminal operation on Canada's Pacific Coast - as part of a US$2.4-billion deal announced Thursday.

The announcement coincided with indications the federal government will smooth the road for pension fund investment in public infrastructure such as highways, transport hubs and utilities.

The Advantage Canada plan outlined by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty on Thursday included a pledge to give maximum impact to government spending through public-private partnerships.

These so-called P3s "will also provide opportunities for Canadian pension funds and other investors to participate in infrastructure projects here in Canada rather than being forced to look abroad, as is often the case now," according to the finance ministry.

Flaherty plans to set up a federal P3 office, and intends to force provinces and municipalities to "consider P3 options" for all large projects that get federal funding.

"It's about time," Michael Nobrega, CEO of the Borealis Infrastructure unit of the Ontario Municipal Employees Retirement System, said Friday.

"We hope he follows through. Pension funds are looking to put money out, so until the follow-through occurs it's not real, but's certainly very, very encouraging."

At the Teachers fund, officials are "quite heartened . . . because Canada has not had a lot of infrastructure opportunity," said Deborah Allan, director of communications for the pension plan, which has $96-billion of assets under management.

Teachers announced Thursday it is paying US$2.4 billion to Orient Overseas of Hong Kong for Deltaport at Roberts Bank south of Vancouver and Vanterm in the Burrard Inlet inner harbour - which operate under long-term leases with the federal Vancouver Port Authority - as well as the New York Container Terminal on Staten Island and the Global Terminal and Container Systems complex in Bayonne, N.J.

The Canadian and U.S. port terminals are of roughly equal value, said Jim Leech, who heads the Teachers fund's private capital portfolio.

In the wider Canadian infrastructure world, "the main complaint that pension funds have had is whether or not the levels of government have the political will to have public assets owned by private enterprise," Leech said.

"You've got some people ideologically opposed, believing that all public infrastructure - highways, airports, et cetera - should be owned 100 per cent by the government, and taxes should just go up to fix them," he said.

"We've been sitting on the sidelines, waiting for the debate to be had and somebody to make a decision."

In the meantime, Teachers' foreign infrastructure investments include Scotia Gas Networks in Scotland and England, 10 power plants internationally, and the Northumberland Water Group in the U.K., along with large timber tracts in New Zealand and the United States.

Other Canadian pension funds have also gone abroad. The Canada Pension Plan Investment Board last month put $1.05 billion into a consortium bid for British water utility AWG PLC, the CPP's largest infrastructure investment to date.

The volume of pension fund money going into infrastructure is increasing globally, observed Andrew Harrison, a pension specialist at law firm Borden Ladner Gervais.

"The principal reason is that these, by their nature, are long-term assets - and that's the key in a pension fund, where you've got people who are accruing benefits today who won't see their last payment out of the fund for 50 or 60 years," he said.

Infrastructure "also tends to provide some inflation protection, in that the payments off the infrastructure tend to rise over time."

The only potential pitfall he sees is that infrastructure assets "tend to be illiquid; if something does happen it's very hard to unload one of these investments."

Rock Lefebvre, vice-president of research at CGA-Canada, observed that defined-benefit pension funds can't depend on safe fixed-income instruments such as bonds to cover their future liabilities.

"They have to risk, so this is a fairly nice risk for all the parties involved."

Domestic infrastructure would have the extra advantage of eliminating currency risk, but fund managers have been complaining for years that Canada's governments have been slow to allow private money into public projects.

"Governments are starting to realize that they can't fund all the infrastructure investment that has to happen," said Harrison, who heads the government relations committee of the Association of Canadian Pension Management.

"You've got these enormous capital pools in Canada to pay benefits to Canadians. There does seem to be a symmetry to using that money to invest in the infrastructure those same Canadians use."

See

P3

CPP

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
David, Dodge, Bank, of, Canada, Pensions, P3, public-private-partnerships, OMERS, CPP, Ontario-Teachers-Fund, OTF, Canada, investment, infrastructure, Ontario, shareholders, economics, budget, Flaherty, Government, parliament, Conservatives, Finance Minister, CPP, net debt, pension, debt