Alberta–Where Women’s Safety Doesn’t Matter

An abuser can seem emotionally needy. You can get caught in a trap of catering to him, trying to fill a bottomless pit. But he’s not so much needy as entitled, so no matter how much you give him, it will never be enough. He will just keep coming up with more demands because he believes his needs are your responsibility, until you feel drained down to nothing. - Lundy Bancroft

The scars from mental cruelty can be as deep and long-lasting as wounds from punches or slaps but are often not as obvious. - Lundy Bancroft

The purpose of human life is to serve, and to show compassion and the will to help others. - Albert Schweitzer

I have a question that perhaps you can help me with.

This is not a #1206 fiction blog that many of you have come to enjoy.

This is not, as my son describes, one of my parables.

This is not one of my skewers of some misguided politician.

And sorry to disappoint you, but I have no opinion on Brexit.

Here is my question.

A woman in small town Alberta has been chased from her property by an abusive son who was the son of a physically and emotionally abusive father.  The father died when the child was young and the child grew up to be an abusive son, coercing and manipulating his mother emotionally and financially.

He threatened her physically and drained her of tens of thousands of dollars in cash over a period of more than a decade.  She has been informed by the RCMP that she cannot return to her property until a way is found to remove him from the property (something that is caught up in “due process”), even though this property is her primary residence and her sole source of income.

An Emergency Protection Order (EPO) was requested but denied.  According to due process, a person with a documented anger issue, a drug abuse issue and firearms cannot be considered a threat to a person's health if they merely threaten the person's Life - they must take action first and then the EPO can be issued (hopefully with the idea that the person hasn't been killed already).  A judge said this week that due process in such cases is ridiculous and that she should just claim her property with him being automatically removed but due process continues to grind anyway.

He has four unsecured firearms on the premises and has been identified by a number of legal and enforcement officials as having a serious but as yet unidentified mental health condition.

He has admitted to the RCMP of addiction to a number of substances with cocaine being his preferred drug of choice.  People have called him and left him messages looking for fentanyl.

The property that his mother has been chased from has outbuildings which he has added new locks to to keep prying eyes from seeing “something”.  These outbuildings are used to generate an income for the owner but that income is in jeopardy since the equipment needed to generate that income is locked inside buildings that the owner cannot access because she is not allowed to return to the property.

He lives in a farmhouse that, once beautiful, has now been documented by RCMP as filled with garbage, feces and cocaine residue and is basically uninhabitable.  He stole a property marker from someone else's residence and put it on the property that he is located on with the hopes of hiding his address from police.

He has expressed on Facebook that he hates Life, Life (and the world) make him angry and that he has dodged being arrested in the past.

His self-esteem is at zero, adding a Facebook "Like" when people call him a "c**ksniffer", "homosexual douche bag", "loser", etc., making him a candidate for displaced aggression as he absorbs abuse from people and then redirects the negative energy he has absorbed to other people.

And yet despite all of this, after a court-mandated 24-hour health assessment was executed by RCMP yesterday, he was released within an hour.

Here are some notable quotes from one of the doctors who performed the assessment when interrogated by the mother.

---

Psychiatrist: I don’t know why he is here.  Why is he here?  We have no reason to keep him.

Mother: You are releasing him? Did you read the affidavit that caused him to be taken in (the affidavit describes 8 pages of propensity towards violent behavior mixed with possible drug addiction and possession of firearms)?

Psychiatrist response: I read some document about a messy house or something.

My observation: Attention to detail makes all the difference.

---

Mother: He has threatened me repeatedly, including making references to bullets and telling me that if I return to my own house, that something bad will happen to me.  He has posted videos on Facebook showing women being beaten viciously by men and he thinks it is funny.  He has fits of uncontrollable anger where he throws things at people.  These and other things are in the affidavit.

Psychiatrist response: People get angry, you know.

My observation: There is a significant difference between anger, which is not uncommon, and threatening to hurt someone, potentially by shooting them.

---

Mother: In addition to the threats he has issued, he was, in his own words and by my observation, abused by his father.  He has also told people that he hates the world and that the world makes him angry.

Psychiatrist response: That is not relevant

My observation: According to psychiatry texts, there is an established correlation between being abused and growing up with mental health issues as a result (including becoming an abuser).

---

Mother: He lives in squalor, living in his own garbage and feces.

Psychiatrist response: Maybe the toilets are not working.

My observation: The toilets work fine. It is not normal to live in one's own feces and garbage.

---

Mother: The court ordered a 24-hour health assessment, which means he can be held against his will while a battery of tests are conducted to determine what the concerns are.

Psychiatrist response: I can’t hold him against his will.  If he has issues, we will provide him with material so that he can explore programs available to him.

My observation: People who have specific illness often do not have sufficient capability to understand that they need help or how to obtain it even if they decide they need it.

---

Psychiatrist response: Does he hear voices or does he talk to God?

Mother: I don't know.  How would I know that?  Why don't you ask him that?

Psychiatrist response: Well, if he doesn't do those things, there is likely nothing wrong with him.

My observation: People of faith talk to God on a regular basis - it is called prayer and last I checked, wasn't considered a reason to be considered mentally ill.

---

Mother: What kind of questions did you ask him?

Psychiatrist response: I can't tell you - client privilege.

My observation: I wonder if the standard assessment tests were ordered and if so, how they could have been conducted so quickly (in less than an hour).  While the answers might be privileged, it is likely the case that the questions shouldn't be (if any were asked at all).

---

Two hours later when the RCMP found out he had been released, the constable on duty called the hospital and, on the record, tore a couple of layers off the doctor.  He also told the mother that he had half a mind to drag the doctor to the house to show the doctor what condition the individual was living in.

And now a person with an identified serious anger issue, hatred against women issues, drug addiction and firearm’s possession is back on the streets.  Hopefully he is not thinking revenge after the embarrassment of being brought to a hospital by police.

Here is my question that I am hoping you can help me with.

Why?

If this individual had attacked a member of the LGBTQ community, a Syrian refugee or an animal, there would be hell to pay (and rightfully so).

And yet, the individual’s mother has to wonder, as the system grinds its way through wondering how to deal with this, if she is even safe.  She is not permitted to return to her primary residence and her sole source of income is being threatened.

It sounds and looks like she is living in a third-world country where women's rights to safety don't matter.

The Bottom Line

The last time I checked, Alberta was supposed to be a modern province in the modern nation of Canada.

But if the system is going to allow women to be treated like this, protecting a predator while victims are left to scramble for their own safety and sanity, then it appears that we have more respect for the cattle that roam the prairies than the women who live there.

Maybe there’s the answer.

While we’re branding the cattle, we can just brand the women also and tell them to forget that they have rights or that there is never a sense of urgency when their emotional, physical or financial security is at stake.

I think we MUST do much better.

While the system pontificates over due process and the rights of everyone, this woman and women like her fear for their safety.  At the same time, people who need help as is the case with the person with the issue are left to languish.  Providing them with self-service offerings to help themselves, when they are not in a position to make lucid decisions that would enable them to avail of such services, leaves people without the help they need.  Hopefully, neither person becomes a statistic as due process takes whatever time it needs or wants.

I don’t think this is right or acceptable.

What do you think?

What can we do about it?

What are we waiting for?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum

A police officer observed that even when they dropped off people who attempted suicide by slitting their wrists, they are often released within two hours.  Does this honor people who are in trouble?  I don't think so.

What do you think?

---

Addendum - Irony - June 30, 2016

In a twist of irony (and somewhat of an insult), the mother described in this story had a message left on HER voicemail today.  It was the Canadian Mental Health Association - they wanted to know how the son was doing.  Given the complexities that the mother and son are embroiled in within the legal system, given how the mother is the one who had her physical safety threatened and given the son's involvement with drugs (possibly dealing as well as using) it is an odd call that likely will not generate a reply.

---

Addendum - Warning - July 3, 2016

51908296 92947295 96788695 86968897 36877495 93868898 96828391 52948087 38847975 79779891 76868792 35759690 87937290 31839296 97929395 46979196 76909383 33899095 94728296 39928889 81689197 75608797 80559494 31839296 33733398 37978396 34956990 92918372 31839296

---

Fort McMurray - Lessons Learned and Hopefully Not Lost

Seems that we never see the fragility of our choices, actions, and their impact on others or the course of the lives of both (all) until we endure some perceived hardship. – Wesley Pierce

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened. – Winston Churchill

Hope is not a strategy – Various

The Fort McMurray fire is now a week in the making and the sense of urgency and bravery required to protect the 80,000 people who lived within the town have produced a miraculous result to-date with only two lives lost (although “only” brings no comfort to the families who lost the two young people killed in a car accident during the evacuation process).

The lives of the evacuees have changed forever in ways that many of us could not fathom ….

…. and sadly ….

…. in ways that we will eventually forget as the shock passes, evacuees find new ways to live and the media moves on to another disaster.

Unless we know someone personally affected, we will move on while the lives of those who fled with just the shirt on their back will never be the same.

Many commonalities are present in such calamities.

Human resilience once again shines, with survival instincts, acts of bravery that frankly I can’t even wrap my brain around and acts of kindness that would soften the hardest heart being present.  It is a HUMAN trait (not just an Albertan or a Canadian one) to serve others when the need is dire.

Would many (or any) of us have the courage that the first responders are showing in the face of a fire that has been named “the beast”, especially knowing that many of them have lost everything they own (and one lost a daughter in the evacuation)?

Would many of us want to have to deal with the mind-bending decisions that are now being pressed upon Government officials?  Difficult decisions need to be made regarding how to pay for the disaster, how to take care of those affected, how to adjust to the economic impact and how to assure the people (both victim and observer) that the Government is doing everything they can. Most of us would melt if faced with the scale and impact of such decisions.

Then there is the inevitable looting by the ignorant minority who seek to prey on people when they have been knocked down for the moment.  Equally sad are those who are executing online scams to steal money from the masses whose hearts have been torn by the tragedy.

There are the pathetic people who cherish such disasters for political purposes, gloating openly as they witness the suffering of others.  Many climate change proponents gleefully touted karma as the reason for this fire, using the disaster as an opportunity to slam the oil and gas industry, to insult people who don’t agree with climate change, to taunt people who are better off than others, etc. 

And then there were some people from the non-governing political parties who went as far as to condemn the government for doing nothing when in fact, all levels of government were doing the best they could with what they had and knew.  Social media reveals the best and the worst of humanity.  I won’t bother to share their Twitter feeds – they don’t deserve to have their messages promoted.

Then there are those who had little to start with, barely hanging on in Life and now the little they had has been wiped out without the safety net of a good job or insurance that many of us take for granted.

But as they say, this too shall pass and we always rise above disaster (insert political rah-rah speech here).  We cry alone or with others, we stare out unseeing in shock, we reach out to others for help or to help, we thank God for our Life, we curse God for our loss, we pray to God for help to get through things or we use events like to to prove that God doesn’t exist.

Over time and after the shock has passed, our moments of weakness and vulnerability eventually transform into resolve – resolve to be stronger for each other, resolve to rebuild and resolve to move forward.

And hopefully, resolve to never allow this to happen again.

It is the latter resolve that I think becomes a point where we often let ourselves down or allow our expectations to be let down by others..

It is a sad reality that few accidents or disasters are never predicted.  We are told that we should be surprised when if we had been an informed populace, we would not have been surprised at all.

I remember my former father-in-law (a USAF colonel), telling me in the early 1990’s about the pending threat of commercial aircraft being hijacked by terrorists and flown into commercial buildings on US soil.  The warnings were contained in many briefing notes for more than one President and yet President Bush claimed to be surprised on the morning of 9/11.

I discussed this in older posts:

• If Paris Surprised You, Then You Are Part of the Problem
• 9/11, Conspiracies and Communication Failure
• National Security: Saying Everything By Saying Nothing
• The Voice of the Rebel

Meanwhile in Alberta …

The fire that decimated Slave Lake in 2011 sounded a warning bell to Albertans regarding the dangers of living in Alberta’s north, especially when many experts warned of the ever-increasing threat facing people living in the boreal forest.

A report issued the following year sounded an even larger warning bell that disaster was likely more a “when” and not an “if”.

And sadly, some observations by Alberta Opposition Leader Brian Jean in the Legislature less than a month ago that fire hazard in the Alberta north required closer attention were met with cries of fear mongering.  Brian Jean lost his home in the Fort McMurray fire but I was struck by his courage to serve others despite his loss.  Such leaders are rare – I wish we had more of them.

And given that few things are truly surprises, there is another event coming that should not surprise us but will be interesting to observe.

Once the shock has passed and everyone settles down with resolve to move forward, the opposition parties in the Alberta and Federal Governments have a difficult decision to make.

If they support the respective Governments in power and properly serve the people who need help, then they run the risk of helping the Government look good and be a lock for the next election.

If they run against Government initiatives or delay them with an intention to make the Government look bad, they have an opportunity to overturn the Government in the next election as long as they can pin the failure on the Government and not on their own evil action.  If delays or failure can be pinned on them instead, then they also run the risk of helping the Government to be re-elected.

Intertwined with this comes the difficulty for those who make up a political party, with some who exist to serve the people and some who exist to serve the Party or themselves.

It is the latter ones I am concerned about, the ones who will do their best to block Government efforts to help the people but who will do so in subtle ways so as to not appear to be serving their own needs instead of the needs of the people.  For some, the temptation that arises when one is attempting to balance serving the people versus serving one’s self will create great structural tension and torment for themselves.  For some, there is no torment … to the good or detriment of the people.  For some, the use of divisiveness amongst the people will serve as a powerful tool, turning the people against each other and the Government, suggesting that not enough is being done when the reverse is true.

And not to leave anyone out, everyone in governing parties must be careful to appear to be serving the people while not blaming disasters on previous governments as the latter strategy can cause a governing party to be thrown out of office if executed improperly. In conjunction with this, parties that once led government but who no longer do so must not protest too loudly that not enough was done to prevent such disasters as they know where blame will be redirected.

I wonder how many of those politicians (and their mindless minions) will be angered that such questions are even posed.  These people will venomously hide behind patriotic themes and messages such as “this is not the time for such things” or “we have higher priorities” while intentionally deflecting observers away from their true intentions.

The people of Fort McMurray need leaders at all levels of society who exist to serve the people, with corporate, personal or political benefit put behind them.

We need transparency from those in power as we solve the immediate concerns of the evacuees, we embrace lessons learned and we evaluate future risks.

And we need to serve those in need, now and always, with a sense of urgency that places their needs above our own.

I think we need to demand all three.

I would like to be surprised for once by a truly people-serving Government from all sides of all Legislatures and across all parties.

What do you think?

Or are you content, once the shock has warn off, to return to same-old same-old when it comes to how prepared we are at all levels of society and how well we are served by those who claim to serve us?

Holding people accountable for the future of the great people of Fort McMurray can wait until "tomorrow".

For today ….

Do what you can to serve the people of Fort McMurray.

Support everyone who lifts and serves them, including volunteers and the Government.

And honor the bravery of those who put their Life on the line tirelessly and for no reward or recognition.

Someday, your Life may be in their hands.

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum – Emergency Preparedness

I have written often about the importance of emergency preparedness and how being informed can be the difference between Life and death.  Relying on government alone is insufficient and one must find a balance between preparedness and paranoia.

Some past musings about emergency preparedness include the following:

• When Emergency Preparedness Meets Reality
• Disaster: How Prepared Are We Really?
• The Game of Emergency Preparedness–Studying the Wrong Rules

In the modern information age, we never have an excuse to not be doing the best we can for ourselves, our families, our community and our nation.

Are you doing your best to be informed and prepared?

Are you sure?

How do you know?

I close with this quote from my friend, Wesley Pierce:

We really should stop perverting the wisdom that is innate in us all and look for the wisdom in our inevitable hardships, not just to lay blame for our own shortcomings.

Addendum 2 - When the Data is Embarrassing (June 9, 2017)

In a report released this week regarding the fire at Fort McMurray last year, a number of embarrassing things were revealed leading up to and during the catastrophe.  Had you asked people if they were ready to fight a fire, they would have said "yes" with great certainty.  Despite this assertion, whoever was in charge of coordinating readiness failed Fort McMurray.  The people, on the other hand, rose to the occasion as humans often do.  What are the lessons here?  Details regarding the report can be found here - Fort McMurray wildfire reaction marred by communication gaps, says report (Calgary Herald).

PC Party of Alberta–The Importance of a Post-Mortem

“Survival my only hope. Success my only revenge” ― Patricia Cornwell, Postmortem

Statistics are used much like a drunk uses a lamppost: for support, not illumination. - Vin Scully

Cognitive psychology tells us that the unaided human mind is vulnerable to many fallacies and illusions because of its reliance on its memory for vivid anecdotes rather than systematic statistics. - Steven Pinker

There are two ways of lying. One, not telling the truth and the other, making up statistics. - Josefina Vazquez Mota

When I was a young, impressionable lad growing up in a small town in Newfoundland, I would sometimes sit spellbound as older generations would tell ghost stories designed to frighten anyone.  A theme often used was the notion of someone who had died violently and without warning and as a result, their ghost was doomed to haunt the area where they had died because their spirit did not know that the body had expired.

Watching the PC Party of Alberta go down in a stinging defeat tonight in the Calgary-Foothills election, I wonder if I am witnessing a similar type of ghost – a political party that has died but which doesn’t know it yet.

When the PC Party was unceremoniously dumped in the general election in May of this year, they were accused of many things, including being dishonest, elitist, arrogant, indifferent and ignorant of the needs of the people (and those are the polite comments).

When the by-election process began in Calgary-Foothills, the PC Party candidate had some alleged discrepancies in education claimed versus education obtained, drawing comments from many (including myself in the post PC Party and Blair Houston–Isn’t Honesty Still the Best Policy?) about the potential dishonesty of the candidate.  The comments were never responded to by the candidate or his party.

The PC Party Interim Leader routinely quoted unnamed polls which claimed the candidate to be taking the riding by storm while no verifiable poll showed the candidate as even coming close.  There were even cries of violations of the Elections Act when a robocall from the Interim Leader cited unverifiable poll results without citing the source.

And then there were insidious personal claims regarding the candidate’s past which, fortunately for him, did not make the light of day.  Had the race been closer, I have no doubt that some unscrupulous person would have used them in a desperate bid for a victory over him.

Despite numerous requests for clarification regarding the allegations against the candidate and the sources of data for the so-called poll results, the candidate and the Interim Leader remained silent.

When I questioned an MLA about the dishonesty that was apparent in the campaign, I was told that what mattered was that the candidate needed to win.

It was this level of general dishonesty and values abandonment that caused me to re-examine the PC Party’s values and I came upon these items on their website:

It reminded me that there is a significant difference between putting a lot of nice sounding phrases on a website and living them when it counts – when it is tempting to do anything but live one’s professed values.

So what happens next - the courage to examine one’s strengths and faults

The PC Party demonstrated that between the general election and this by-election, they have in fact learned absolutely nothing and repeated many of their earlier mistakes.

In the private sector, when we win or lose big, it is often of value to conduct a post-mortem, either to understand how the big win came about so we can recreate it or how the big loss came about so we can avoid it.

It is clear from how this election was conducted that this was either not done at all after the general election loss, not done well or done well but whose results were completely ignored, making it necessary to revisit the need for a post-mortem analysis to have some shot at improving the future of the Party.

A classic post-mortem has some primary elements in it, including but not limited to the following:

• Allowing the appropriate amount of time to transpire between the event being analyzed and the post-mortem itself, allowing people to catch their breath and gather data but not allowing so much time to pass that people forget the need to have a post-mortem because “the sting” has faded.
• Setting an appropriate post-mortem meeting format, including having specific time contracts and agendas that contain realistic, measurable expectations and outcomes.  Meaningless “it wasn’t my fault”, “it was someone else’s fault” or “we are completely helpless victims” messages in the form of witch hunts, gripe sessions or expressions of victimhood merely massage or destroy egos but don’t produce solutions.
• Honesty in understanding what went right without inflating one’s ego too much.
• Honesty in understanding what went wrong without destroying anyone’s ego too severely.
• Understanding the real reasons for the win or the loss and knowing how to apply the right levels of discernment in identifying useful, valid information while rejecting the rest.
• Inviting the right people to the meeting.  Not everyone deserves a voice and some voices that would prefer to be silent need to be heard.
• Ensuring that the post-mortem be conducted by an objective, outside observer who has no vested interest in the team itself but instead, has as their purpose the need to produce a valuable post-mortem.
• Ensuring that the post-mortem is respectful, honest, humble, ego-less, fact-focused and thorough, with measurable action items, assignable accountability / responsibility and delivery dates being a result of the process.
• Ensuring that the leadership, leading up to, during and following the post-mortem, clearly motivate, communicate and monitor expectations, communication mechanisms, collaboration and results.  Servant leaders who successfully cast a positive vision are much more useful than bullies and dictators.
• Ensuring that the results of the post-mortem are actually followed up on with appropriate communication and support mechanisms in place to ensure success.  Great ideas with no follow-up or success-focused mechanisms for support become sources of “I told you so” later (if anyone is left standing to say it).

Teams that are not afraid to examine themselves, to identify where they went wrong, to champion where they went right and to find a way to produce better results through intelligent strategic and tactical correction produce winning teams.

The others?

Well – they usually end up as examples for others to avoid:

Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.

The Bottom Line:

Winning when the wins come easy often take little effort and little is learned from such victories.

Losing requires a lot less effort than winning and little is learned if one’s ego or resources don’t allow for analysis of the loss.

Winning after having experienced a loss (especially a potentially catastrophic or fatal loss) requires significant levels of effort, courage, honesty, transparency, collaboration, respect, knowledge, data, strategy, intelligence, wisdom and humility.  While many who have experienced easy wins often go on and on about how great they are, the true measure of greatness is in how well one comes back after a difficult or staggering loss.

Will the PC Party of Alberta bounce back from the embarrassing losses of this year or is this how we will remember them?

I guess it depends on how well they are able to examine themselves and if they are willing to do whatever it takes to become relevant again.

Do you think they are willing to do whatever it takes to turn their fortunes around?

Do you think they have what it takes to accomplish this?

Do you think they have the humility to see the importance of performing a post-mortem and the importance of executing it well based on their findings?

Does what they think even matter anymore?

How do you know?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

---

Addendum – The Inevitable Spin and Closing Thoughts

Many in the PC Party of Alberta (and some columnists) are spinning this loss as a victory for the PC Party because their third place finish was so close to the second place NDP.

Unfortunately, when one takes a riding that has always been dominated by one Party (even as recently as the general election four months prior to the by-election) and that same Party finishes almost 17% points behind the winner four months later, that’s definitely not a win.

That’s an embarrassment, plain and simple.

The truth that the PC Party doesn’t want to discuss is that the Asian voters in the riding almost always vote for the PCs so the Party was guaranteed a certain percentage of the vote – a reality that will change over time as other parties begin to dominate the political landscape in the riding and across the Province.

Such a difference in how one sees such a loss is a primary example of the different lenses that a politician and someone in business use to view the world.

Meanwhile, the Interim Leader of the PC Party noted this on Twitter:

Unfortunately, this positive spin ignores a dishonest campaign but this will be forgotten in the memory of a Party striving for relevance.

But then again, this is what a politician is best at – spinning a loss into a win no matter what the data says to the contrary.

On a side note but related to the concept of “how does one spin something unfortunate”, the revelation a couple of days before the by-election that sitting PC MLA Sandra Jansen would be speaking at a Federal Liberal Party fund raiser demonstrates that the Party has lost its control over optics, message management and internal communication.  While I applaud her right to be bipartisan (we might be better off if more politicians did this), the poor timing and optics gave the PC Party more jabs to ward off in the critical days leading up to the election.  In politics and in business, we must define our own message lest someone else define one on our behalf, possibly to our detriment.

There is much to do within the PC Party of Alberta.

Do they have the will, the resources, the humility, the intelligence and the time to climb out of the death spiral that they are in?

Time will tell although history in Albert politics is not on their side, since every political party up to now has ceased to exist shortly after being removed from power and their initial stab at proving that they have changed hasn’t demonstrated much if any change at all.

Meanwhile …..

This is likely my last musing on the PC Party of Alberta – it’s time to move onto things that are more relevant.

---

Related posts:

PC Party of Alberta – Bless Me, Father, For I Have Sinned

Politics and the Mutability of Human Values

PC Party and Blair Houston–Isn’t Honesty Still the Best Policy?

PC Party of Alberta–Who Will Bell the Cat?

PC Party of Alberta–Proving Einstein and Churchill Right?

---

PC Party of Alberta–Who Will Bell the Cat?

The opposite for courage is not cowardice, it is conformity. Even a dead fish can go with the flow. - Jim Hightower

The most courageous act is still to think for yourself. Aloud. - Coco Chanel

The heavy response to my blog from a couple of days ago, PC Party of Alberta – Proving Einstein and Churchill Right? and earlier posts such as To Demand Better of Your Politicians, Demand Better of Yourself, Going Bat Sh*T Crazy with Alberta Premier Jim Prentice and other posts remind me of a funny children’s story I read as a young boy.

The story, Who Will Bell the Cat (and its variants), goes like this:

A group of mice were arguing in a mouse hole one day about a cat that had been terrorizing them.  With every passing day, the cat would sneak up on one of them without warning and would make off with the unsuspecting victim.  The mice were now tired of this and were arguing about what to do about the villain.

One mouse suggested that if they put a bell on the cat’s neck, then he would no longer be able to creep up on them unawares.

Recognizing the brilliance of the solution, the mice spent considerable time congratulating themselves on how they had solved the problem when their celebration was interrupted by a lone voice in the back of the mouse hole.

“The solution may be brilliant”, observed a wise old mouse, “but who will bell the cat?”

Silence filled the mouse hole and eventually the mice went about their business, realizing that there is a big difference between being full of ideas and having the courage to carry them out.

The PC Party of Alberta has been plagued by difficulty for some time, with a significant amount of dissension within the ranks regarding a number of things, including but not limited to very interesting personal interests and habits of former MLAs that have not been revealed to the public, interesting personal interests and habits of current MLAs, significant unhappiness with the current Party President and her lack of publicly visible leadership, significant concern over the potentially unethical, immoral (and possibly illegal) actions of some MLAs in the last election, the performance of the current interim leader, the belief by some that the last election wasn’t really lost (really?) and other things.

Then there are the Party members who discourage dialog by shouting down anyone who dares to suggest that something might be wrong and the grotesquely diabolical who actively discouraged dialog around change before the election (because everything was perfect), came to an amazing epiphany after the election that dialog around change was welcomed and needed (and wrote beautifully moving passages to promote this) and yet who work behind the scenes to make sure that such dialog is still controlled, restricted or prevented.

Whew … take a breath.

Meanwhile, members pound tables in frustration in coffee shops, covertly send emails and text messages back and forth and post vague or thinly disguised messages of concern on social media.

Interestingly, many of these messages (including the private ones) end up on my laptop and phone, with people saying “you should say something about this”, which is curious enough, but it is always followed by “but make sure you don’t quote me”.

The content is so intriguing, titillating and damning and its delivery so covert that I feel like The Man from U.N.C.L.E.

Occasionally, I make observations about the PC Party (and other political parties, to be fair) and there is a public gasp of “I can’t believe he said that” and a private whisper of “Thank you for saying that – you have much more courage than I do.”

My suggestion to members of the PC Party of Alberta is this:

If you see ways to make the Party better for the sake of the Party itself, its members and the people of Alberta, such ideas won’t see the light of day if you choose not to take action or if you insist that the ideas only be discussed in dark recesses and alcoves that allow you to whisper your ideas without someone discovering your identity.

It takes courage to make change.

Lack of courage with plenty of ideas merely produces dissent, cynicism, frustration and wasted energy.

And it doesn’t get you re-elected.

After all, drinking the Kool-Aid is like drinking vehicle coolant – both have the potential to produce blindness.

People kept quiet in the past, often selling their own souls, their ethics and their morals, so that they wouldn’t be thrown out of power.

But the difficulty now is that doing the same thing keeps one from improving, both from within the Party to root the rot out and to present a stronger Party that is more in tune with the people of Alberta in the 21st century.

Until this happens, the ethical, moral, ideological and yes, legal foundation will never be there to form another government …. ever.

The problems have been identified.

The “villains” have been outed.

Many great ideas and brilliant people exist (especially younger people) to make a significant, positive difference to the Party and to the Province of Alberta.

However, brilliant ideas and an endless supply of passion require courage in action to bring these ideas to fruition.

So … the only question remaining is …..

….. who wants to bell the cat?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

---

Addendum – Members Weigh In …. Anonymously

A number of members have emailed or texted me to thank me for posting this musing.  Ironically, they prefer to remain anonymous, thus demonstrating the depth, breadth and scale of the problem that exists within the Party.

---

Addendum 2 – The Importance of Data – August 24, 2015

After the PC debate in Calgary-Foothills tonight, this item was posted by a PC Party supporter (click on image for larger version):

The data used by Ms. Walker to confirm that Mr. Houston is the best candidate is either humorous or pathetic, depending on how you look at it.  With powerful insight like this, how can the Party go wrong?

---

Addendum 3 – Questioning the Strategy – August 28, 2015

Watching the lackluster performance of Mr. Houston in several debates and recognizing that he is a perpetual candidate who has ran for various seats over the years without winning any of them, I wonder why the PC Party chose him over a “ringer”, especially if the riding is as important to the Party as they claim.

Is this a strategic failure on the part of someone within the PC Party or did they believe or fear they were going to lose despite their desire for a win, thus not wanting to sacrifice a more important player?

Only a select few know.

To Demand Better of Your Politicians, Demand Better of Yourself

Those who stand for nothing fall for anything. - Alexander Hamilton

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. - Plato

What is tolerated today becomes accepted tomorrow. - Various Attribution

An interesting conversation this week on the Facebook page of a member of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta reminds me of why we have the politicians we have.

It’s because we accept anything they give / tell us.

And while we like to rant and rave about what politicians allegedly do to us as we claim victimhood at the hand of their alleged incompetence or corruption (as some people claim), the reason politicians do what they do boils down to one thing.

It’s because we accept anything they give / tell us.

On the previously mentioned Facebook page this week, there was a discussion around the right-leaning parties of the Alberta political sphere and the possibility (or impossibility) of the two primary parties, the Wildrose Party and the Progressive Conservative Party, reuniting against the left-leaning NDP Party currently in power.

While the conversation was interesting and mostly respectful, I asked a couple of questions, specifically around whether people can come to an agreement regarding the definition of the words “progressive”, “conservative” and “values”, since failure to come to an agreement on what these words mean would prevent any such alliance from happening.

This sparked a healthy exchange until a former member of the Alberta government proceeded to give their views.  The individually waxed poetically about such concepts as principles, values, forgiveness and acceptance and the need “to do better and be better for, and, to each other.”

I thought it was a pretty cool, unifying message although one thing remained stuck in my craw from the previous election loss, a rumor that had been attached to this MLA and which suggested or implied unethical or potentially illegal behaviour and so I asked if the rumor were true.  There was no issue with stating it publicly since it had been rolling around in the public space anyway.

[Background Note] In my world and in the public-facing role I have, questions come in my direction every day, some friendly and inquisitive and some accusatory / confrontational.  When one accepts a public-facing role, one does one’s best to answer every question respectfully and as fact / data-based as possible.

When I asked for clarity on the rumor that was already in the public space, the former MLA and others supporting this person immediately demanded that my question be removed and made the demands in such a way that the person who owned the Facebook wall felt threatened as exhibited in this text exchange between the Facebook wall owner and myself.

The reason he gave for deleting my request for clarity was also intriguing.

So the mere act of asking for clarification on something being discussed about a former politician (who has a desire to be re-elected) in the public space provides people with a reason to feel fearful of asking for clarity or for allowing the request to stand.  This is especially intriguing given that the person being questioned had just cited the need “to do better and be better for, and, to each other.”

Meanwhile an executive within the PC Party texted me this message as he observed the events that unfolded.

I wonder how a Party can expect to rebuild itself on values, transparency and the like when people who request clarity on same are threatened or an effort is made to intimidate them into silence.

The Bottom Line

While many tout our democracy as the greatest form of government on the planet, they forget that the key elements of it need to be constantly, consistently and vigorously earned, re-earned, defended and championed.

One of the tenets of our democracy is the right to request transparency in the actions of those who claim to represent our best interests in our legislatures.

However, a dual crime of democracy occurs when someone who claims to serve us dares to shout us down instead of providing a response to requests for clarity AND the person being shouted at acquiesces without resistance or reason.

When these things happen, our democracy is in danger of producing a result that is not as ideal as that which we desire or deserve.

In such situations, if our democracy or the results it produces is tarnished in any way, we can’t blame the people we put in office nor can we criticize their actions because the reality is that we put them in office and if we accept their actions and keep re-electing them anyway, we have only ourselves to blame.

After all, when we have high expectations of our government and its elected representatives and they appear to be disappoint us consistently, maybe we need to re-examine our expectations of ourselves before criticizing the people we elect.

Unfortunately, I think it is always easier to hold others to a higher standard rather than ourselves since dodging responsibility and accountability requires much less effort when we expect both to be exhibited by others and not ourselves.

What do you think?

Does it matter?

What are you doing about it?

Forget asking what a politician stands for – what do YOU stand for?

In service and servanthood,

Harry

Addendum For the history buff who wondered if I chose the Alexander Hamilton quote deliberately on the 211th anniversary of his death in a duel, I can assure you that it was pure coincidence.

My friends at the Bank of New York used to joke that on the day he died, he told employees of the Bank that he founded not to do anything until he got back.  Hey .. it’s their joke … not mine!  Great people over there with a great sense of humor.

---

Addendum 2 – Things That Make You Go Hmmmm – July 12, 2015

I received a cease and desist letter from a legal firm representing an unrelated person who thought I was writing about them.  Oooops – guilty as charged for a crime as of yet unknown by anyone except the perpetrator.  I guess there are more skeletons present than people are aware of.

As a friend of mine pointed out today, Israeli police sometimes offer something of interest to see who takes the bait, referring to the process as the integrity test.  The party drawn out is clearly guilty – one just needs to figure out the crime.

In the spirit of offering to help people as much as I can, I offer politicians the quick reference guide to lying as shown below.  Click on the image for a larger version.

---

Addendum 3 – Closing Thoughts – July 18, 2015

What I find interesting about the party in question is that many people who blocked progress before and who fought openness in order to prevent embarrassing truths from coming out are now the same people writing blogs about the importance of truth and openness while simultaneously still blocking the truth.

They wanted to be the hero then by preventing the truth from coming out, they want to be the hero now by pretending to offer enlightenment that is allegedly unknown to everyone else and they are attempting to be the hero of the future by keeping skeletons buried in the closet.

You can’t have it all.

---

Addendum 4 – I Guess I’m Not Done – August 12, 2015

With a by-election being called in Calgary-Foothills, I dared to ask what the strategy was to win the hearts, minds and votes of the people after the devastating loss by the PC party in May.

Here is one person’s response (click on the images for larger versions):

I guess the PC party (or at least the loudest people within it) have some learning to complete.