Everyone can all breathe now. It’s over.
Sure, it will be at least another nine days before Alberta’s election results are made ‘official’, but at least life can return to more normal activities and not be bombarded by advertising or news items or the latest outraged individual taking up everybody’s social media status.
Maybe now, regardless of who or what party will gain enough seats to govern this province, Alberta can move forward with initiatives that will help its residents regain some level of dignity and respect in regards to the rest of Canada.
Doing so will get these other provincial governments, who have been bad mouthed for months by each political party in this fight to govern, to respond in kind and look at negotiating compromises or assisting in getting issues resolved rather than resorting to calling each other out like a pair of high school kids suggesting “let’s take this outside.”
Granted all of the pundits, commentators and much of the public across the province agree this election has been among the nastiest campaigns as far back as anyone can remember.
And that fact, in my estimation, is one of the reasons other provinces have taken such a hardline stance with Alberta.
Take British Columbia for an example, since it is after all the one that Alberta has the biggest beef with.
Now, it must be noted that B.C.’s governing party has a bit of a conundrum, in that it’s minority is being propped up by what most would call a ‘fringe’ party that has one motivation which severely limits development — unless of course it’s something ‘green.’
So as far as the relationship between the two provinces, to say it is a strain would be an understatement the size of the Grand Canyon.
The chasm isn’t so much about the philosophical debate over pipeline safety or protecting the environment of the west coast, but more on whether one jurisdiction can over-ride the jurisdiction of another simply because it feels it can.
And therein lies the conundrum — how do you satisfy a sense of equality when both sides are fighting for what is perceived to be ‘in the best interests of their constituents?’
Is it wrong to want economic development in a province that’s reliance on natural resources is so vast and dominant that no one knows how to change it?
As well, is it unacceptable to want some sort of measures in place to assist in the coverage of expenses incurred should a situation come up that could irreparably damage land and property while also cost millions to sort of clean up?
No, is the simple answer, but as we well know nothing is straight-forward or easy when politics is involved.
Toss in another level of government and the confusion rate drives into the stratosphere.
Plus as the voracity of the election rhetoric continues to escalate, the more dug in all sides seem to get and the less chance there will be any conciliatory discussions.
Need to change
Politics will always be somewhat divisive, the difference is in how these dissenting viewpoints and policies are discussed, debated and ultimately crafted into the rules that we all live by.
Sure, in the past there were strong expressions both for and against issues depending, but each party and politician held themselves to account in regards to abstaining from personal attacks and maintaining some sense of decorum.
Unfortunately, as society has ‘evolved’ (or devolved as the case may be) it seems the baby has been thrown out with bath water.
Some will likely blame the generation that seems to be all about ‘me’ and ‘my feelings’, although how can you explain the nastiness that those from my generation currently being expressed during this election?
The answer to that probably lays in the fact that many party policies are essentially the same nowadays, so how do they differentiate from the rest — by attempting to tear the others down.
And that, for one, is where we fall down because its easier to sling mud than to try and logically explain a stance on issues.
But that is…just an observation.