NDP Leadership campaign- policies compared

Introduction

Every voter in Alberta’s NDP leadership race has their own set of public policy interests. Some of these voters have few if any interest in politics and have few policy issues except those involving their pocketbooks.  Pocketbook issues include being able to eat, own a cell phone, have a place to call home, access a family doctor and affordable transportation.  Whether this is the typical NDP voter is another question, but at the end of the day if the successor to Rachel Notley is to defeat Danielle Smith’s UCP they will need to understand these pocketbook issues.

NDP leadership policies can be found at these websites: ·         https://voteforjodi.ca/jodis-leadership/# ·         https://teamganley.ca/policies ·         https://www.sarahhoffman.ca/priorities ·         https://nenshi.ca/foralberta From this perspective, NDP leadership contestants do need to focus on issues that speak to the vulnerability of Albertans. In practical terms this means stable employment, a government which delivers public services like health care and education, all the while keeping taxes low. The Right’s castigation of the NDP as “tax and spend” will have to be addressed by a credible fiscal and economic policies. In 2023, the NDP tried to boost their fiscal credibility by asking Todd Hirsch, ATB Financial’s former chief economist to write a report on fiscal policy entitled A Better Future.

In this post I examine the policy positions of the four remaining candidates in the NDP leadership race. Accompanying is an Excel spreadsheet which categorizes by candidate a couple dozen policy fields where the respective candidates have enunciated positions.  “Policy” is taken to include anything the candidates purport to define as policy which includes both very specific recommendations as well as “values and priorities.”  The spreadsheet only reflects the positions found on candidates’ websites. This post examines fiscal, economic, education, energy, environmental, housing, labour and affordability policy fields.

Policy Platforms Alberta NDP leadership 2024condensedwithout McGowan

Fiscal Policy is the expenditure, revenue and savings policy of a government.   Alberta’s fiscal policy is an important element in addressing affordability issues particularly spending on health, education, social services, and housing. The critical revenue issue remains the lack of diversification of provincial revenue streams which Danielle Smith wrote about in a 2021 University of Calgary School of Public Policy piece she wrote while CEO of the Alberta Enterprise Group. Interestingly, and disturbingly, the article is now longer accessible at the School of Public Policy  although it can be found in  chapter 2 of the e-book Alberta’s Economic and Fiscal Future.

Below is the PDF of the article long disavowed by Smith when she was attacked on this issue by other leadership candidates . Her September 2020 newspaper article on Alberta’s fiscal policy as a “disgrace” is still available on the web.

Alberta politicians of any stripe are risk averse when it comes to speaking about taxes in general, and specifically a sales tax.  Alberta’s NDP leadership candidates are no different. (See Graham Thomson’s chapter in A Sales Tax for Alberta- Why and How for background).

AF16_AB-Key-Challenges_Smith

Alberta budgets are mainly constructed based on an oil price forecast.  However, the price of oil is volatile, and the royalty system is based on oil prices over which the province has no control.  For six decades Albertans have not been adequately protected by successive governments by fiscal policy consequences principally driven by fluctuating commodity prices. In fact, Albertans have only been paying between 50 and 95 per cent of the taxes required to fund government services.  The gap has been filled in by resource revenue or borrowing. Current surpluses are more an artefact of government decisions to ride the wave up and down of the resource cycle.

 

Alberta goes through periodic fiscal crises which are manifested by a roller coaster of relatively high levels of debt causing fiscal restraint, subsequent surpluses driven by higher oil and gas prices, and paying down debt and then a “spending spree” to repair fiscal restraint which then inevitably meets an oil price downturn repeating the boom-bust fiscal roller coaster. This is also why governments of a conservative stripe reinvent fiscal rules (balanced budgets, restraints on spending resource revenue) designed to place constraints on spending and other measures like loan guarantees.

Unfortunately, except for Ms. Ganley, the candidates are silent on this whole area.  Ms. Ganley aspirationally calls for an end to “corporate handouts“ which would go to fund public education.   She also specifically recommends increasing the personal exemption to $26,000 which is estimated to get 150,000 Albertans off paying provincial taxes.

Ms. Calihoo-Stonehouse does offer to amend the royalty formula when prices go above $70 per barrel and to create an Alberta Royalty dividend which “puts money directly back into the pockets of hard working Albertans while safeguarding our shared future.”

The lack of detail on any element of fiscal policy from the other two candidates demonstrates that many politicians do not wish to talk about budgets except when it comes to providing general platitudes about policies to increase spending on current issue areas such as housing or improved access to rural physicians.  Moreover, all the candidates don’t talk about how the budget process would operate to determine which of the many promises or policies they would fund given inevitable fiscal constraints, such as low oil prices.  Some, like Ganley and Hoffman, put specific dollar amounts to their pledges.  The absence of a budget prioritization is not unusual for party leadership candidates, especially those without cabinet experience.

Although fiscal policy was not addressed meaningfully by the leadership candidates, there are many specific policy recommendations as well as aspirational and rhetorical policy positions in areas of spending and regulation.  These main areas include education, health, environment, energy and housing.  The spreadsheet highlights in italics the aspirational and rhetorical policy recommendations which do not provide any specificity on how these aspirations will be accomplished. Aspirations include use words like- “support,” “work with,” “promote,” “organize,”  “address,” “priorize,” “boost,” “establish,” and  “ensure.”  Words such as “amend,” “reinstate,” “restore,” “reverse,””stop” are more definitive and action oriented.

Affordability

On affordability Ganley is calling for driving down auto insurance costs for Albertans by introducing a public option by extending ATB Financial’s mandate into the insurance market. The others do not comment specifically about affordability measures.  Hoffman, under Housing hopes to drive down housing costs by supporting advances in modular housing manufacturing.

Economy

As with fiscal policy there is a dearth of policy that specifically deals with Alberta’s economy. With Gil McGowan’s departure there is little evidence that the candidates see the economy as an important element for policy-making except rhetoric of good paying or living wage jobs.  McGowan believes in a centralized approach to economic planning including an Economic Diversification Corporation, public auto insurance, and interesting polices to transition bitumen production from oil to base physical products reducing CO2 emissions. This approach is generally consistent with his work on the NDP government’s energy diversification panel of which he served as co-chair.  McGowan also had many specific recommendations to essentially roll back many of the UCP’s labour policies and some of these are picked up by Ganley (see below).

Education

Although Sarah Hoffman confines her policy areas to housing, climate, and health care, she is a former Edmonton School Board trustee and believes very strongly in public education.

With respect to K-12 education. Calihoo-Stonehouse offers both aspirations “reform curriculum” and specific recommendations to

teach treaty and the history of residential schools in all years of the provincial curriculum and to stop scheduling exams, class-room head counts (for the purposes of funding), or school events on culturally significant days of observance such as Ramadan or Yom Kippur, for example.  She alsol would like to reinstate sex education in the provincial curriculum. More aspirational goals include “addressing” social issues, hunger and health in schools, and “integrating counsellors and public health nurses in schools.”

Kathleen Ganley has a host of K-12 policies which are a mix of aspirational and specific recommendations.

• Restore class-size reporting and set standards to ensure students are getting the education they deserve.” Ganley does not set a target for class sizes or standards.
• Build desperately needed schools in growing communities. There is no budget or targets dates or completion.
• Increase funding for mental health without a budget number or number of new counsellors. This is aspirational without targets or budgets.
• Give back control of pensions back to teachers. This refers to the UCP’s efforts to centralize more power into AIMCo and attempt to neuter the ATRF’s board from setting investment policy. How this is to be done is left unspecified.
• Take the politics out of the curriculum by ensuring experts are developing it and I establish clear timelines for the curriculum to be reviewed and renewed. Classroom teachers would have a major role in this work. This is both specific and aspirational in the sense that an action or intent is specified but how it will be accomplished. If unclear.
• Universal school nutrition program. Good idea but the means and the cost are unspecified.
• Ensure Schools Have Proper Ventilation. No target completion or budgets are provided. McGowan had this in his program.
• Support public education by ending the UCP’s wasteful corporate handouts. This was also found under fiscal policy but how much could be gleaned from corporate handouts are not provided.

Nenshi’s “priorities” and “values” include “Restoring the best public education system in the world.” For post-secondary education (PSE), Nenshi sees post-secondary education as an “investment” to ensure access for qualified Albertans, while also attracting the” top talent from around the world. Every Albertan must have access to high quality public education and skill training so that they can meet their potential.”:  This approach is eerily similar to what the UCP is currently doing to the system. The UCP sees the post secondary system as a job factory. The other candidates don’t specify any policies specific to PSE, other than Hoffman discussing student residence housing (below)

Energy

Calihoo-Stonehouse has no specific recommendations on energy other than the aforementioned royalty dividend and higher royalty rates.  Ganley would cancel the energy war room and launch an “inquiry into the total orphaned and inactive well clean-up liability, and a comprehensive review and complete overhaul of the Alberta Energy Regulator.”  This action is long overdue.

Nenshi’s program is aspirational and states:

• Protecting and expanding Alberta’s position as an energy superpower (oil & gas and renewables) while reaching net-zero emissions no later than 2050 (emphasis added)
• Working with our energy sector, both oil & gas and renewables, to not just weather the transition, but to lead it;
• Supporting entrepreneurship and small business, the largest source of employment in Alberta, and encourage innovation and investment in multiple sectors
• Help both medium and large sized businesses grow and create good jobs;

These aspirational statements may worry many traditional NDP supporters as this is an unabashed support for the oil and gas industry, although renewables are swept in. Nenshi channels Stephen Harper and Jason Kenney who echoes Evra Levant’s ethical oil arguments. Nenshi is a cheerleader for the oil industry and apparently is blind to the capture of the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) by industry and the environmental disasters caused by bitumen and oil and gas industries. If Nenshi is unmovable on this issue, he will lose many NDP voters who do not share his vision on energy.

Environment

Environmental policy can be broken into emissions policy, coal mining, carbon sequestration, wildfires, use of renewables, reclamation, the Alberta Energy Regulator, parks, and water.

On emissions policy, Hoffman has an extensive policy agenda.  Measures include:

• Reduce emissions by 35 per cent from current levels by 2035, while supporting creation of good industrial jobs for Albertans
• Implement a made in Alberta cap and trade system to replace the federal carbon tax, oil and gas cap, methane regulations, and clean electricity regulation.
• Adapt Alberta’s existing industrial carbon price (known as TIER) to form part of the new cap and trade system and expand to cover all industrial emissions.
• Build on our successful Renewable Electricity Program to create a competitive carbon policy guarantee program for large scale emissions reduction and removal investments.
• Support new clean industrial innovation (including lithium production and refining, battery manufacturing, bio energy with carbon capture, biochar, emissions free use of hydrocarbons like carbon fibre, and direct air CO2 capture)
• Build on our successful Renewable Electricity Program to create a competitive carbon policy guarantee program for large scale emissions reduction and removal investments.
• Increase monitoring of emissions and include Indigenous communities in monitoring while respecting their rights and local knowledge.

These policies are largely operational and underestimate the complexity required to switch from a carbon pricing model to a markets approach using “cap and trade” model which permits industry to buy missions credits. These policies are by their very nature intractable in an environment which is increasingly polarized and suggests an abandonment of economists’ preference to use a simple pricing mechanism to encourage switching from fossil fuels.

Hoffman also seems to be comfortable with “carbon capture” by creating “a competitive carbon policy guarantee program for large scale emissions reduction and removal investments.”  This comes from the Pathways Alliance playbook which has promised $16-billion in investments over half a decade if, and it’s an expensive if, the federal and provincial government- Alberta’ and federal taxpayers- will pay roughly two-thirds of the freight. More importantly this is at odds with the notion that to stem CO2 and methane emissions, oil and gas and bitumen production must decline.  This reality is a very hard for any Alberta politician to face.

With respect to coal mining, Ganley’s campaign pledges to cancel exploration activity across the Eastern slopes including road building, exploratory drilling and test pits.  She would also prohibit the AER from “issuing approvals, including for water permits, in categories 3 and 4, and cancel leases issued in conjunction with the UCP’s cancellation of the 1976 Coal Development Policy …, pending the outcome of the regional plan identified in the previous point.” Nenshi would “stop coal mining on the eastern slopes” without providing any detail.  He also pledges to establish “an effective provincial disaster preparedness and response plan, resourced to meet the challenges of the future,” which I assume are mainly due to climate change.

With respect to renewable energy, Ganley states “The future of our energy sector “needs to be a ‘yes and’ conversation, where we continue to produce oil and gas and develop renewable energy to its full potential. Renewable energy is good for our economy and good for the people of this province.”  Hoffman goes into considerable detail on renewables including:

• Cancel the UCP’s EV levy and replace with an EV rebate;
• Develop a Crown corporation to provide low-emission public transportation between Alberta communities;
• Build out EV infrastructure within municipalities and along provincial highways;
• Fast track development of renewable energy production;
• Reversal of the UCP’s policy of sabotaging the renewable energy sector;
• Renewable energy power plants go to the front of the line for approval processes;
• Solar For All program to make electricity more affordable by making it easier for individuals, communities, farms and businesses to install to solar power, including getting rid of the limit on solar installations for homes, farms and small businesses, and providing assistance to low and middle income families and incentivising community projects;
• Bring more energy storage onto the grid;
• Invest in smarter and more robust transmission and distribution systems, including cooperating on expanded regional interties;
• Re-commit to a net-zero electricity grid by 2035; and
• Create incentives for Albertans to use energy strategically (e.g. run appliances and charge EVs off peak)

This is a very ambitious program, one that will come with impressive spending which is unbudgeted. Novel is the use of public ownership to create a network to support public transportation between Alberta communities.  Whether this is mainly the Highway 2 corridor is not clear. How costly this will be is unstated.

Ganley and Hoffman both support measures to ensure companies pay for their clean-up obligations. Nenshi and Calihoo-Stonehouse are silent on this issue. Hoffman sets a timeline of 2050 for well clean-up.  She also will “hold companies accountable for leaks from tailings ponds and for polluting sensitive areas – such the egregious leak at Imperial’s Kearl site. “ Ganley also would cancel the R-Star program which is in a pilot program that allows companies to pay for reclamation by getting credits against future royalty payments.

Naheed Nenshi speaks about “protecting our parks, pristine natural areas, and heritage sites,” which is general.  Ganley, on the other hand, would pass legislation protecting Alberta parks from sale or privatization and require public debate before a park is delisted.

Ms. Ganley is most explicit when it comes to reforming the Alberta Energy Regulator. Ganley would direct a complete review and overhaul, including an examination of the AER’s regulatory practices and enforcement mechanisms to identify systemic deficiencies contributing to environmental risks and mounting liabilities.     Ms. Hoffman advocates a “wholesale review” of the AER  “to provide true independence from industry, and real tools to protect the public interest.”  Nenshi  and Calihoo-Stonehouse do not discuss the need for an overhaul of the AER.

Ms. Calihoo-Stonehouse has a detailed plan for managing water which includes a Water Rights Act to protect headwaters and main river arteries.  In addition, “regulators” would be required to “actively monitor and disclose a range of water conditions, collaborate with other jurisdictions affected by Alberta water, and inform the public in real time when there are issues with this precious resource.”  She would also establish a Centre of Excellence at the University of Lethbridge to invest in the research, development, and commercialization of innovative water technologies to help use water smarter. Besides these specific measures, she would promote the “developing a Water Conscious Economy,” to encourage industries to be water and climate conscious. Ms. Ganley would also investigate the potential contamination of Alberta’s water and “the broader implications for Alberta’s water quality and ecosystem health.”  Mr. Nenshi would “prioritize” water security and planning for both drought and flood conditions.  Ms. Hoffman would undertake a “serious review of water allocation,” with a view to prioritizing human needs first, crops and livestock second and industry, third.”

 Health

Sarah Hoffman has the most detailed platform regarding health care.  She promises that every Albertan would be part of a primary care network.  To operationalize this, she would establish a Healthcare Workforce Planning and Implementation group. She would specifically recruit up to 3000 Nurse Practitioners, Physician Assistants and Clinical Assistants. She would transition away from the current fee for service physician payment system and create “rural healthcare training opportunities” to attract physicians and other health care professionals to rural Alberta. In addition, she would work with medical faculties to attract more foreign-trained doctors. Her plan would also include the expansion of both acute care facilities (South Edmonton hospital) and build at least 1500 continuing care beds to take pressure off the acute care system. She does not price out what this will cost, however.

Both Ganley and Hoffman support publicly owned continuing care facilities with specific standards relating to staffing and wage levels. Ganley would absorb private operators into the public system if they don’t operate at a “reasonable standard.” Nenshi is essentially mum on health care except noting his desire to create “evidence-based pathways for those with mental illness and addictions, based on the world leading plan in Calgary that I championed when I was mayor.”  Calihoo-Stonehouse would address the roots of addiction through the school system and through Family Health Clinics.

Housing

Currently, Alberta is significantly short on affordable housing.  While higher interest rates are largely the result of Bank of Canada policies and unprecedented international migration, the provincial government has some tools to advance building of affordable homes. These levers include labour policies (attract and certify building trades) and the ownership of public lands particularly in centres outside Calgary and Edmonton. Important though are ensuring all new builds are all net zero with a suitable transition period. The leadership candidates are silent on energy efficient homes or getting off natural gas as a heating fuel.

Sarah Hoffman has the most fleshed out policy of the four candidates since housing policy is one of her three policy pillars.  Her policies are a mix of specifics and aspirations.  She wants a “home for everyone” which is defined as “increased access to dignified quality, accessible, culturally-appropriate, affordable housing throughout the province.”  She expects to build “more public, co-op and non-profit housing that meet accessibility needs while avoiding urban sprawl. This form of housing would require an annual budget of $600 million over the next ten years.  For context, Alberta currently spends about $405 million for the Affordable Housing Partnership Program, $130 million to modernize seniors lodges, $91 million for repairing government-owned social housing buildings, and $75 million for the Indigenous Housing Capital Program.  She would also ensure “long-term, sustainable funding for repairs, renovations, and maintenance.” In addition, she supports more federal funding for housing new Canadians. She also wants to build more on-campus housing.

How she would meet this ambitious agenda includes:

• Low-cost and no-cost loans to developers to ensure one-third of their units are non-market affordable housing or permanent supportive housing;
• Set housing targets for municipalities and provide incentives to hit those targets;
• Make public land available for housing through repurposing underused municipal, provincial, and federal land, including former school sites, and underused commercial sites;
• Transfer ownership of this land to the re-established Ministry of Housing;
• Encourage innovations in home-building, including factory-built housing by working with Alberta’s post-secondary institutions
• Provide incentives to companies who will manufacture advance modular housing, low carbon concrete and other techniques that achieve scale, drive down costs, lower carbon footprints and increase climate resilience; and
• Use innovative ways of financing affordable housing by, for example, encouraging foundations and pension funds looking for philanthropic options for investment and using the principles of halal financing which is based on equity and shared risk, to provide funding for new developments.

These programs do not have costs associated with it and is a grab-bag of market and government initiatives.  Addressing housing needs is hugely complex involving powerful private financial and development industries as well as municipal governments, cultural groups, and social agencies. The other candidates are largely silent in this area and Hoffman has importantly carved this out as a particular strength in her campaign.  But here again, there is much aspiration but limited information about where the money will come from to support these policy ideas. Home building with an environmental lens is also missing.

A key facet that is not directly addressed is the problem of homelessness or houselessness. Naheed Nenshi does specifically address homelessness by stating the aspirational goal of “taking real action on homelessness.”

Other areas

Kathleen Ganley, the former Justice Minister, would ensure Albertans have meaningful access to justice by providing $70-million a year to Legal Aid Alberta and the Law Society of Alberta. She would also establish a “unified family court” in the province to resolve legal issues and conflicts, including child and spousal support, parenting time and property division. In the field of labour relations, Ms. Ganley would end the practice of “double breasting” and she would also bring back card-based certification.   Double breasting refers to the employer establishing and operating two companies, one which hires strictly union employees and bids on jobs from contractors who require union subcontractors, and one which hires strictly non-union employees and which bids on jobs from contractors who require a non-union workforce. Card-based certification is union certification without a vote.

Summary

Naheed Nenshi, the presumptive frontrunner, has kept his policies, which are really values or priorities, vague as any frontrunner is wont to do.  This minimizes attacks from his rivals and creates a wide scope of maneuverability against Danielle Smith and the UCP if he succeeds Rachel Notley. Mr. Nenshi is more pro-business than any of his competitors. His silence on the environment, other than general platitudes, is consistent with his support for the province’s entrepreneurial energy sector.

From my perspective, the presence of so many spending initiatives, mainly uncosted in the absence of where revenue will come from, is a big problem.  This is less so for Nenshi who has left his options open.

From a pure policy point of view, both Hoffman and Ganley have put forward conventional progressive programs which harness the spending power of the state. Many of the environmental policies of these two candidates will be widely supported by NDP progressives but raise doubts for centrists attracted to the party by the Nenshi machine. Judging from the two debates in Lethbridge and Calgary, Nenshi has more experience as a political power broker given his mayoral duties and, given his academic training, appears more knowledgeable in what it takes as a politician to implement policy.