Some contradictions from Paul Hinman

Calgary Sun columnist Paul Jackson seems to be back on the Alberta Alliance bandwagon. In today's column he describes Paul Hinman as "bubbling with ideas". Based on the number of quotes from Hinman contained in the column, it would appear that Paul Jackson recently interviewed the faltering Alberta Alliance leader.

That must have been quite an interview.

I wonder if anyone brought up the fact that Jackson has recently (i) called for Hinman to step down, and (ii) described the Alberta Alliance as "seemingly dead" under Hinman's leadership. Hehehe.

But I digress.

This column is noteworthy because it contains a couple of contradictions.

Firstly, Hinman makes the remarkable observation that Kevin Taft's Liberals may be the beneficiaries of Ed Stelmach's recent victory in the Alberta PC leadership race, and that the Alberta Alliance will then rise to power after "the shock is over":

He believes Stelmach's term will turn out to be only a "babysitting" government, and Liberal Leader Kevin Taft may be right in predicting his own party will make gains come the next election.

"The Liberals might go up the middle, but the Liberal gains will be short-lived. In the best-case scenario, we might see a minority government, but after that shock is over, Alberta voters will be looking for a solid, Conservative alternative."

That alternative, Hinman, 47, contends will be the Alliance.

This position contradicts the usual dogma Alberta Alliance members spurt, namely, that the Alliance will blow away the PC's in a sudden, massive, electoral sweep - much like the PC sweep of the Socreds back in 1971. Now, it would appear that Hinman believes there may be a Liberal government in between the PC dynasty and the Alliance coming to power.

Oh well.

Next, he indicates that he would hire more public servants:

To encourage more doctors, nurses, teachers, firefighters and other essential service workers to move to Alberta or stay in their jobs, he'd give them tax incentives, too.

But would then reduce the total size of the public service at the same time:

He'd reduce the size of the provincial public service.

Because, according to Hinman, there are simply too many public servants in Alberta:

"On a per capita basis, Alberta has more government employees than any other provincial government and even more than the federal government, yet the private sector is crying out for employees."

But, according to Statistics Canada, Alberta has the lowest number of public sector employees per capita in the country. From Table 1-3:

	Province	Public Sector Employees per 1,000 population
1.	Alberta	83
2.	Ontario	85
3.	B.C.	88
4.	Quebec	92
5.	N.B.	104
6.	Nfld.	109
7.	N.S.	117
8.	Manitoba	123
9.	P.E.I.	128
10.	Saskatchewan	137
11.	Yukon	168
12.	N.W.T.	183
13.	Nunavut	207

What is Hinman going on about? Based on this data, he couldn't be more wrong.

I assume there must be an explanation for this contradiction, but Paul Jackson wouldn't appear to have even noticed it.

Perhaps I should endeavor to email Paul Hinman and see if he'll provide it to me.

Source (click for full size):

The Alberta Alliance's Sugar Daddy

I don't think it is an exaggeration to say that Randy Thorsteinson is the most notable personage in the brief history of the Alberta Alliance Party. He was the first leader, and the main party builder. He got the party registration done - which in and of itself was a massive undertaking.

However, until I reviewed the financial statements filed in the offices of the Chief Electoral Officer for the Province of Alberta, I did not realize that Mr. Thorsteinson deserves another title as well.

He is the AAP's official "Sugar Daddy".

Check out this screencap from the final page of the Alberta Alliance's 2004 Financial Statement:

In 2004, the Alberta Alliance received a total of $121,300.00 in cash contributions from individuals who contributed more than $375.00, and from corporations (evidently, these two types of donations must be reported individually). Of that, $85,000.00 (or 70% of the total) came from individuals with the surname "Thorsteinson". An additional $15,000.00 (or 12% of the total) came from Randy Thorsteinson's company, Cascadia Motivation.

So, a total of $100,000.00 (or 82%) of individually reportable cash contributions essentially came directly from Randy Thorsteinson, or persons he is related to.

A measly 18% of contributions in this category came from all other party members and contributors.

Now look at the 2005 Statement:

The cash contributions from the Thorsteinson clan dropped to $2,000.00. Furthermore, the total value of individually reportable contributions plummetted from $121,300.00, to $32,689.12, and of the $32,689.12, only $17,045.00 was cash (the remaining $15,644.12 was comprised of "valued contributions"). Given that there were no valued contributions in the 2004 Statement, the Alliance actually realized a total drop in reportable cash contributions of 86% between 2004 and 2005.

Wow!

The Alberta Alliance is clearly having financial problems, and it looks like their main rainmaker has decided to cut his losses. As such, the financial problems will continue to grow and multiply, and will persist in causing stresses inside the party.

And you can read about it all right here, at Alberta Alliance Watch.

Santa comes early for Alberta Alliance members

Great news AAP members! Ipsos Reid has released a new poll, and it shows that support for the Alberta Alliance has increased by a whopping 50% - rising from 2% to 3%:

Now, for the bad news (I always have some). This result is within the margin of error of the Leger Marketing poll I blogged about here, so this Ipsos Reid poll in fact confirms, beyond all doubt, that the Alliance is at historic, pitiful lows in public opinion.

Any argument that the 2% finding of Leger Marketing was an outlier is now difficult to maintain.

I look forward to blogging about how you Alberta Alliance members deal with this issue during 2007. The ball is clearly in your court now.

Source: Ipsos-Reid
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 800 adult Albertans, conducted from Dec. 13 to Dec. 19, 2006. Margin of error is 3.5 per cent.

Alberta Alliance runs another deficit in 2005

Regular readers of this blog may recall that I previously broke the story of the incredible debt burden being carried by the Alberta Alliance at the end of the 2004 election. Well, I have just reviewed the Financial Statement for 2005, and the river of red ink continues to flow unabated.

Here is a summary of the salient points from the filed statement:

• on Dec. 31, 2005, the AAP had total cash assets of $18,185.00, and total debts of $402,518.00, for a net debt of $384,333.00;
• during the year ending Dec. 31, 2005, the AAP had incoming revenues of $108,578.99, and expenses of $112,810.00, for a net deficit of $4,232.00;
• the AAP revenues included $20,000.00 for leadership candidate fees (4 candidates at $5,000.00 each);
• the AAP had no income from fund-raising functions whatsoever.

There is an additional observation from this filing that strikes me as particularly important:

When one looks at the liabilities of the Alberta Alliance listed on their Financial Statement for 2004, there are two line items: a loan of $115,000.00, and accounts payable of $280,432.00. In 2005, the liabilities are almost identical - a loan of $115,000.00, and accounts payable of $287,518.00.

Interesting.

If you look at note 6 to the draft 2004 statement, it would appear that the $115,000.00 loan is non-interest bearing, so that would explain why that figure isn't changing - the Alliance has decided not to make a payment on it. But how does one explain the high accounts payable figures? Usually accounts payable are interest bearing after 30 days, and the interest rates are usually pretty high. Why is the Alliance carrying such high accounts payable?

Keep in mind that the Alberta Alliance recently changed (i) the location of its office, (ii) the hosting of its website, and (iii) the job description of their Office Administrator.

Were these changes made in order to cut costs?

Are creditors being paid?

I don't know the answers to these questions ... yet. But, I do think there is a story here, and I will be pursuing it.

Merry Christmas.

2%

I hate to be the one to deliver a lump of coal to the stockings of Alberta Alliance members, but I really must make mention of the results of the latest Leger Marketing poll published by Angus Reid Global Monitor on November 9, 2006, in an article entitled Alberta Tories Remain Well Ahead.

If you scroll down the page half way, you will see this table:

The Alberta Alliance polled at 2% amongst Albertans in October, 2006.

Two percent.

This number is obviously unacceptable, even by rump party standards. The Alberta Allance received 9% of the vote in the provincial general election in November, 2004. The party has lost over 75% of the support earned under the leadership of Randy Thorsteinson.

Paul Hinman has cratered the party. When will you Alberta Alliance members stop living in denial and face up to this self-evident truth?

Source: Leger Marketing
Methodology: Telephone interviews with 900 Albertan adults, conducted from Oct. 23 to Oct. 30, 2006. Margin of error is 3.3 per cent.

Migration completed

The migration to the new version of blogger has been completed. It should be noted that:

• the permalinks for all posts are now different;
• the comments feature, which was not heavily used, has been turned off by default. There were some anonymous personal attacks against Craig Chandler on one post, that I could not delete. It is my intention in future to allow moderated comments on a post by post basis;
• a new "Labels" feature has been added so that you can search by name or by topic.

I will be putting up a couple of new posts on the Alberta Alliance in the next day or so.

New slogan for the Alberta Alliance: "The party with a death wish"

Given the press coverage the Alberta Alliance has received this past week, I'm sure you AAP members must be longing for the days of political obscurity.

Doug Firby of the Calgary Herald wrote an op-ed piece on Friday in which he expressed bewilderment over Paul Hinman's bizarre decision to urge his party members to join another political party:

Citizens need more than one option

Doug Firby
Calgary Herald

Friday, October 13, 2006

OK, folks, it's time to raise the white flag. There's no sense resisting the inevitable any longer. Alberta is finally, officially a one-party state.

The final nail in the coffin came this week, thanks to the leader of one of those "other" parties, which on the basis of its leader's statement clearly is not a party at all.

Paul Hinman, leader of the Alberta Alliance, confirmed he is urging party members to buy memberships in the PC party so they can have a say in who becomes the next premier.

You read that right. The leader of one party is urging his followers to join another party. In the words of a notorious federal Liberal campaign ad, "We're not making this up."
...

The editorial is behind the subscriber wall, but you can read it here.

The coverage on the op-ed page of the Edmonton Journal was even worse:

I agree with the points raised here. Paul Hinman's weird twists and turns will ultimately lead to the Alliance becoming further marginalized in the minds of Albertans.

If Ted Morton wins, the Alliance is toast, given that Hinman has essentially admitted that Morton would make a good Premier.

If Ted Morton loses, the Alliance will still be toast, given that Hinman has essentially admitted that the Morton wing of the Tory party is worthy of support. One can only imagine the fun the Tories will have when Hinman attempts to rail against them in future. After all, if the Tories are so bad, why is Hinman encouraging his own members to join them?

I know what you Alliance members are thinking. You think Ted Morton will lose, and then cross the floor and join up with the AAP, and that will save your party.

He won't.

Ted Morton is running a relatively strong campaign. Even if he loses, he will (i) go into cabinet and attempt to run for the PC leadership again, or (ii) attempt to get a federal Conservative nomination, and enter federal politics. Either of these options is far more enticing than being a fart catcher for Paul Hinman.

Furthermore, Ted Morton has unequivocally stated that he is against vote-splitting, so he has essentially foreclosed on the possibility of joining your party with his own statements.

Too bad Alberta Alliance members. Maybe you should have listened to me and taken steps to jettison Paul Hinman when I first pointed out to you that he was doomed months ago.

Bill 208 turd attracts Alberta Alliance flies

This was entirely predictable:

Alliance brass back Morton
Morton, Alliance share aim to unite the right in Alberta

Jason Markusoff
The Edmonton Journal
Wednesday, October 11, 2006

EDMONTON - Ted Morton's Conservative leadership bid has attracted the support of an MLA from another party.

Paul Hinman, leader of the right-leaning Alberta Alliance, confirmed Tuesday he is urging party members to buy Tory memberships and help elect Morton as PC leader and Alberta's next premier.

"I just told him that it's critical to get you in as premier and I'll see what I can do to help," Hinman said.

Hinman and Morton praised their efforts as a unite-the-right fusion of like-minded conservatives, but drew harsh words from some Progressive Conservatives and from the Alliance's former leader.

"I think it's ridiculous," said Randy Thorsteinson, who formed and led the party from 2002 until last year, when Hinman took over.

"If Ted Morton supported what the Alberta Alliance did, he'd be a member of the Alliance. Ted Morton's a Tory, and I'm not a Tory."

But Morton has won praise from Hinman and party president John Murdoch because his platform mirrors several of their views, from strident opposition to same-sex marriage and support of private health care to creating an Alberta-only police force and pension plan.

Both men have committed to supporting the rookie MLA's leadership campaign.

On Tuesday, Murdoch drafted a letter he'll send to every Alliance member -- if party council approves -- saying Alliance members should become PC members and Morton should be their choice.

"We're not campaigning for Ted Morton," Murdoch said.

"We're campaigning for the Alliance party's platform."

"The realism is that the Alliance party is here to move the province towards more traditionally conservative values. However we do that, as long as it's legal, we'd be more than happy to do it."

Morton, a former University of Calgary political scientist, has stressed throughout the campaign that the PCs must stop bleeding support on the right flank.

He notes that 210,000 fewer voters picked the Tories in the 2004 election than in 2001. At the same time, Thorsteinson's upstart Alliance picked up 77,500 votes, helping Hinman win the Cardston-Taber-Warner riding and become the party's first elected MLA.

It's time to "bring them home," Morton said, and expressed hope the Alliance's top players will help him do that.

"I think if you do a job description of what's required of the next leader of our party, it's to reunite all conservatives into one party again," Morton said.

"And if I'm the person who can do that best, I think that at least on that issue it will help me."

He warned that if the "wrong person" replaces Premier Ralph Klein the Alliance's fortunes will improve.

"Instead of one Paul Hinman, there will be five or six."

...

Hinman said he supported Morton in 1997 when he campaigned successfully to become a senator-in-waiting, and the two have remained friends and ideological allies since they were both elected two years ago as MLAs from opposing parties.

"Even though Ted is what I'd consider a little weak on reducing taxes and reducing the size of government, he's no question the most conservative leader out there," Hinman said.

He said he and Murdoch have vowed not to become PC members themselves, though the Alliance party council has approved dual card-holders.

Thorsteinson, who once ran against Klein as Social Credit leader, said the Alliance should not abandon its mission to replace the Tories altogether.

"It's bewildering to me. I think the Progressive Conservatives are incapable of change, and the only way you can change Alberta is for a whole new party to come in and take over," he said.

"I think it's faulty logic on John and Paul's part."

jmarkusoff@thejournal.canwest.com

© The Edmonton Journal 2006

As the article points out, Morton has received a good deal of press coverage for his private member's bill on gay marriage - Bill 208. Bill 208 purports to provide some legislative protections to Alberta's marriage commissioners and teachers, in that they would be allowed to opt out from participation in refereeing gay marriage, or teaching about gay marriage in the classroom. Ted Morton is presently the Progressive Conservative MLA for Foothills-Rocky View, and is probably in the top three or four in terms of the current leadership race.

While Bill 208 does not purport to change the definition of marriage back to one man and one woman, social conservatives love it because it does create division and lends credence to the myth that there is a "gay agenda" to take over the schools and persecute Christians.

Morton has been quite brilliant in bringing this forward at the time he has. This issue has clearly motivated the social conservatives and ultra-religious to get active and join his campaign. His strategy here reminds me a bit of Karl Rove's cleverness in making sure some swing states had referendums on the traditional definition of marriage to coincide with the last Presidential election in the U.S. Those referenda were considered crucial in motivating the Christian conservative base to get out and vote - which naturally benefitted George W. Bush far more than John Kerry.

It is this same, hidden, underlying message of intolerance towards gays that Alberta Alliance members find so irresistible. They believe that Ted Morton is going to keep gays in their place, so they have decided to join a separate political party en masse and support it.

Make no mistake that this is the issue that is behind Paul Hinman's and John Murdoch's actions.

An email to Paul Hinman

Paul Hinman has weighed in on the lack of disclosure rules in the Progressive Conservative leadership race. He was quoted in the October 9 issue of the Globe and Mail:

Paul Hinman, the leader of the Alberta Alliance Party, an upstart right-wing party aiming to eat into the Conservatives' support, said the Tories' flagrant lack of rules shows how “out of touch and undemocratic” the ruling party has become.

He said because the political stakes are so high, the public has the right to know who helped pay the eventual winner's bills. “But this race is all about power and control — not fairness.”

I will give credit where credit is due. Paul Hinman has commented on an important issue here. But, the question that came to my mind as I was reading this story was whether Paul Hinman or the other Alberta Alliance leadership contenders have disclosed their donations from last year's leadership contest.

I certainly can't recall reading anything about it, which causes me concern. I mean, if disclosure of leadership donations is an indicator of a party's democratic ideals and fairness, surely the AAP would have demonstrated it's own commitment to democracy during it's leadership contest last year, would it not?

Since I can't recall those numbers ever being published, I've decided to email Paul Hinman and get them. Here is a screencap of my email, which went out at 4:05pm today (click to enlarge):

I've always wondered what kind of financial support the Alberta Alliance leadership candidates received during last year's race. Thank goodness Paul Hinman isn't a hypocrite and is principled enough to disclose this information. ;-)

Communications problems continue to plague Alberta Alliance

More evidence surfaced today of the communications problems within the Alberta Alliance Party. Angus Reid Consultants put up a story on their website wherein they discussed the Leger poll that I blogged about here:

Angus Reid Global Monitor : Polls & Research
Alberta Tories Would Get New Victory
October 9, 2006

The Progressive Conservative party holds a large lead in Alberta, according to a poll by Leger Marketing. 54 per cent of respondents in the Canadian province would vote for the Tories in the next election.

The Alberta Liberals—led by Kevin Taft—are in second place with 12 per cent, followed by Brian Mason’s New Democratic Party with nine per cent, the provincial Greens—led by George Read—with five per cent, and Randy Thorsteinson’s Alberta Alliance with four per cent.

So, let's think about this. Angus Reid managed to get the names of all the party leaders correct - including the leader of the Green Party - with one notable exception: Paul Hinman and the Alberta Alliance.

Randy Thorsteinson left the leadership almost a year and a half ago, on April 15, 2005. Since then, Eleanor Maroes served as Interim Leader, and then handed things over to Paul Hinman, who was elected leader at the convention held almost one year ago, on November 19, 2005.

Yet a major political polling firm in this country has somehow not been informed of these developments.

These kinds of mistakes make the entire party appear unprofessional.

The Alberta Alliance membership should perhaps familiarize themselves with the old adage: "a fish rots from the head down." When you are the only party whose leader isn't identifiable to a major public opinion firm, you clearly have a problem of communications rot setting in at the head of the party. I have blogged about these communications problem before.

... I anticipated a co-ordinated response involving letters to the Calgary Sun Editor from the executive of the party, as well as from party members. I expected those letters to state that the party had full confidence in the leadership of Paul Hinman, and that Paul Jackson was out to lunch for suggesting there was any need to replace him.

Given that I expected the party to rally around the leader, I must admit that I am somewhat flummoxed at what actually occurred. ...

It is time for you Alberta Alliance members to shit or get off the pot.

Read this blog.

What you are doing is clearly not working. Either you can continue on this path to your own self-destruction, or you can start acting like a political party, and change personnel and direction.

I will concede that these are tough choices to make, but politics is a tough business.

New Leger Poll: Meltdown for the Alberta Alliance

A new Leger Poll was released yesterday. The results for Paul Hinman and the Alberta Alliance Party are nothing short of disastrous. Here is a table summarizing the results:

Across the province, the AAP is at only 4%, with a minuscule 2% of the vote in the City of Edmonton. In July, 2005, the Alberta Alliance was polling at 13%.

All polls since February of this year have placed the AAP at 5% or less.
When are Alberta Alliance members going to wake up and smell the coffee?

Methodology

This Leger Marketing opinion poll was conducted among 900 respondents throughout Alberta, September 20th and 30th, 2006. The maximum margin of error for a sample of this size is ± 3.3%, 19 times out of 20.

The margin of error for each area, namely Calgary, Edmonton and other areas combined is ± 5.7%, 19 times out of 20. The Margin of error for the sample of self-declared PC Party supporters is ± 4.4%, 19 times out of 20.

Using the latest data from Statistics Canada, final results were weighted according to gender and region to ensure a sample representative of the province of Alberta population.

Source: http://legermarketing.com/documents/pol/061004ENG.pdf

Paul Hinman snubbed by mainstream Albertans

A rather high profile meeting just wrapped up in the Province of Alberta. It was called the "Calgary Congress", and was put on by Link Byfield's Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy.

The meeting was called to consider and debate options for renewing the Canadian federation. The speakers list read like a veritable who's who of conservative politics in both Alberta and the rest of Canada as well: Preston Manning, Ralph Klein, Lorne Taylor, Bert Brown, Dr. Barry Cooper, Dr. Ted Morton, Lyle Oberg, Dr. Leon Craig, Dr. Brian Crowley, Jason Kenney, Tasha Kheiriddin, and many more.

As such, the speakers represented the Reform tradition, the Alberta Progressive Conservatives, the Conservative Party of Canada, and non-partisan conservative groups and think-tanks.

Conspicuously absent from the speakers' podium was Paul Hinman, or anybody else from the Alberta Alliance.

My sources inform me that Paul Hinman was there as a paid delegate, but really just mingled with the crowd and attempted to look important. He offered nothing to the meeting, and may as well not have been present at all.

This once again proves that the AAP is not taken seriously by mainstream Albertans. Even a group of right wingers can't be bothered with Hinman and the Alberta Alliance, and obviously could care less what the AAP has to say on the important issues of the day.