Pete Townshend was 20 when he wrote the anthem “My Generation” in 1965. “I hope I die before I get old,” he said then—but maybe he’s changed his mind now that he’s retirement age. The first wave of post-war baby boomers has started to turn 65. With the mass retirement of this generation, the workforce will undergo a significant demographic shift, further transforming an already much-altered society.

To explore the changes, Alberta Views has a new department called Work Shift. Each month’s dual profile will feature one retiree and one new graduate in the same field. A comparison of their backgrounds, education, career aspirations and achievements will show how much Alberta has changed in a single generation. Whether we’re in our 20s or our 60s, the changes in school and work over our lifetime have been dramatic: personal computers, the Internet and social media; the rapid development of the oil sands and exponential growth of the province’s population.

This year we celebrate the 15th anniversary of the founding of Alberta Views. Local Perspectives Publishing was incorporated on July 25, 1997, and the first issue of the magazine went to press in December of that year. Alberta Views was born, so to speak, into a different world: Conrad Black owned most of the major newspapers in Canada, including the Edmonton Journal and the Calgary Herald. The ultra-right Alberta Report was still the most widely circulated magazine in the province. Enthusiasm for free trade and free market Thatcher/Reaganomics was in full swing. Public infrastructure was being dismantled. It was the height of the Klein era (1993–2006) of deregulation, privatization and severe cuts to education, healthcare and welfare. Klein diminished the role of government, slashing the civil service, introducing a flat tax, widening the gap between rich and poor and increasing inequality, which was bad for everyone.

The lead story in that first issue was “The Perils of Privatization: When Government Goes Wrong,” by Larry Pratt, who used  CKUA as a case study. We wanted our readers to think of themselves not just as individuals, but as citizens with the power to change things for the better. I wrote in 1997:

“The purpose of Alberta Views is to provide thoughtful commentary on the culture, politics and economy of our province. We present diverse viewpoints in order to give expression to a wide range of opinion and to encourage discussion and debate. We believe independent media are essential to a democratic society. In Canada the control of newspapers, television, radio and magazines is concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. The media feed us entertainment and celebrity news; they treat us as consumers. Alberta Views addresses its readers as citizens who want to be informed and active, who take responsibility for the kind of society we live in.”

In this first issue of 2012, we critique the peculiarities of Alberta’s tax regime, expose the deception of political language and examine the role of Albertans in the creation of the world’s newest country, South Sudan. Our mission hasn’t changed.

But the world has changed. Access to information on the Internet has lessened the concern about media ownership, although making sense of it all is still a challenge. The September 11, 2001, attacks on the US led to the “war on terror,” undermining social trust everywhere. The development of our controversial oil sands is now a significant engine of Canada’s economy under international scrutiny. Klein retired in 2006. In 2011 Conservatives chose their first woman leader to be our premier. But perhaps the biggest change has been the collapse of the global economy.

The 2008 economic meltdown has made many question the ability of free trade and an unregulated free market to deliver what most people need to live decent lives. People need homes and jobs, yes. And they also need education, roads, parks and healthcare. Only government can provide the regulation, tax framework and services to shape society positively for the benefit of the many rather than only the few.

This is a watershed year. If an election is called, it will be the most interesting contest Alberta has seen in decades. With the change in the old guard of the Conservatives and the rise of new political parties, organizations such as Public Interest Alberta and a more active electorate, we have a new political culture.

As it goes in the broader society, so it goes here at Alberta Views. In 2012 I arrive at retirement age. I am passing the baton. The day-to-day operation of the magazine will be taken up by a new generation: the capable team listed in our masthead led by publisher Beth Ed and editor Evan Osenton. Evan will be writing the editorial from now on, and I will write a note from time to time. My role here will be different, but I will not be uninvolved.

To celebrate our 15th year, Alberta Views is offering a free gift subscription to any Alberta resident retiring in 2012 or graduating from an Alberta post-secondary institution. Just write or phone us, or visit albertaviews.ab.ca and click on Work Shift in the top menu.

Against all odds, this small publication has survived and made a difference. In 2009 Alberta Views was named Canada’s Magazine of the Year. May it continue to grow and thrive with the energy and vision of this new generation.

Going It Alone

Alberta’s 10-year flat-tax experiment

An editorial by Evan Osenton

Alberta has had a lot of “funny” ideas about revenue over the years—even printing its own currency during the Aberhart era. (Merchants wouldn’t take “prosperity certificates”; even MLAs refused to be paid in them.) But this province has never fled from good sense so fast as when it adopted a flat tax in 2001.

With a flat income tax, every Albertan pays the same rate: 10 per cent. If this sounds like the height of fairness—waitresses and millionaires contributing at the same rate—ask yourself two questions: Why have no other provinces and no Western countries adopted a flat tax? And why are such wobbly democracies as Estonia, Russia and Mongolia the kind of countries that have?

The truth of the flat tax is that everyone doesn’t pay the same rate. Low- and middle-income earners (i.e., most of us) end up with the bigger tax burden, while the wealthiest citizens get the lighter load. The craziness of a system in which those who benefit most invest the least to keep up said system is why Western countries opt for progressive taxes. It’s hardly Bolshevism: No less than the father of capitalism, Adam Smith, wrote in The Wealth of Nations: “The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor.… It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”

Consider the owner of a thriving company. His success owes in part to his hard work, of course. But he didn’t teach his hundreds of employees to read; doesn’t pay their basic healthcare costs; doesn’t build the roads they use to get to work. All told, he’s getting a bargain. It stands to reason he’d want to keep education, healthcare and roads as good as possible, even at the cost of a few more tax dollars, even if only to stay wealthy himself.

But the flat tax does more than defy good sense: the Parkland Institute estimates it costs Alberta $5-billion annually in forgone revenue. Truth is, the only reason we can afford this giveaway is by offsetting it with black gold, a.k.a. non-renewable resource revenue (NRR). Sheila Pratt in “Taboo No More” (p 30) shows how oil royalties pay for 30 per cent of our services. As with a flat tax, relying on NRR might even sound great at first: “We get services without having to pay taxes for them!” But Pratt speaks to a number of influential Albertans who argue that NRR will drop off faster than we realize, and may already be declining per capita. They’d like to see more of it invested in the Heritage Fund and to see taxes tweaked. And these champions of saving and new taxes…? Not who you might expect.

The flat tax is also one more reason for the gulf between rich and poor in Alberta—the fastest-growing gap in Canada, according to a 2011 study by sociologist John Myles. This province’s richest 1 per cent now have as much wealth as the poorest 53 per cent combined. According to Public Interest Alberta, 73,000 local children live in poverty, 40 per cent more than in 2008. And this inequity affects us all. “The vast majority of the population is harmed by greater inequity,” write Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett in The Spirit Level. This includes the well-off, since no one is immune from the health outcomes (e.g., more mental illness) and social outcomes (e.g., more violence) associated with less equal societies. The authors argue compellingly that the broken societies and economies we see in Europe and the US today have everything to do with rising inequity.

But Alberta will sometimes get it right. Prosperity certificates, for example, were cancelled after a few months. Our flat tax has now been around for a decade and has quietly done nothing but cost you and me some $50-billion, helped squander a one-time oil bonanza and made our province a smaller, meaner place. In a new year, nothing says we can’t come back to our senses.

As some people may have noticed in the not so recent past there was a week with no new blog post. The office has been abuzz with our Christmas promotion (which runs until December 31st!) and I have sadly had little time to write. With that said I offer a “Franken-blog” if you will. What follows is a post about two issues from two separate years of Alberta Views. If I believed in serendipity I would say I was meant to write them together as both articles share a similar idea (completely by accident!).

Graphically, these issues are vastly different. The Jan/Feb 2004 issue has an old logo that takes up the upper third of the cover. Inside there is a mix of gloss and mat paper, with differing colour patterns (some pages are black & white and others are colour). The cover image is of an artist’s studio with easels and artists painting a nude model. The September 2005 is a huge contrast, with a picture of Queen Elizabeth II and Premier Ralph Klein cutting a legislature shaped cake in celebration of Alberta’s centennial. This issue is all glossy and full colour with the new logo. It is also a smaller issue, counting only 71 pages versus the 76 pages in 2004.

Where the two issues unite is between the two articles I discuss below. Both confront the subject of sponsorship and funding in two necessary social structures: the arts and academia. Both of these structures are indicators of societal health and both are affected by funding problems. With government cut backs funding needs to come from elsewhere and corporate funding seems to fill this void, whether for good or bad.

Part 1:

Alberta Views’ Jan/Feb issue in 2004 focused on the arts and the immensity of talent in Alberta. In an article entitled “Three Views on Funding the Arts” management consultant Lori Ann Edwards, The Message Parlour owner Blair Cosgrove and Theatre Junction founder Mark Lawes shared their opinions and experience about Alberta’s art scene. Hailing from different backgrounds their perspectives differ greatly but they all manage to agree: art is important in society.

Sponsorship and funding seem like a perfect way to ensure artistic growth. Both parties benefit: corporations can improve their reputation by demonstrating community involvement (not to mention a tax write-off), while artistic ventures can gain some mobility to do what they always intended without worrying about making ends meet. But does financial support mean they have to create according to someone else’s vision?

Cosgrove says yes, he writes, “We believe that money gives us power. But art gives us a power far more potent.” As an owner of a communications and public relations agency in Calgary, he understands the influence of currency, both financial and social. “I want artists to be freer to pursue their dreams, to do what they love so the rest of us can enjoy the fruits of their work. I want artists to behave less like businesses, not more.”

In theory I support this completely, however one thing causes me to worry. Without having to worry about making ends meet, like every other citizen of this province, there is no guarantee that the funding is spent prudently. Nowadays you can write anything off as a career expense with the smallest amount of reasoning. My concern with blindly funding people (in general) is how well they will use this privilege. For this reason, I support Lori Ann Edwards position that even art organizations need to be aware of their financial situation.

“Unfortunately, many arts organizations in Alberta still see themselves as exempt from the key criteria that an organization—any organization—must meet to become a thriving business. There’s a pervasive notion that solid business practices ‘really don’t apply and wouldn’t work in our organization,’” writes Edwards explaining how art institutes and organizations have not fully grasped their ability to reach out and contact other groups with strong financial backgrounds to assist them on their boards. They are constantly keeping art in the art family instead of bringing in a ringer that could jump-start them into profitability.

As Mark Lawes explains, not all funding is bad. “The well-being of the arts in Alberta is in question, and many generous financial supporters and volunteers are attempting to address this crisis. The Alberta Arts Stabilization Fund, for example, came about because of the financial difficulties of several large arts institutions in Alberta. The focus of the APASF is to assist arts organizations in the development and the application of business principles, and reward companies for sound financial management as well as the ability to generate revenue and become self-sustainable.”

Part 2:

In 2005 Alberta Views published an article written by freelance writer Alison Azer investigating the effect of corporate sponsorship in academic research. Her main concern is academic integrity and the influence industry has over research through funding.

“If universities are shifting toward a model guided by the market’s “invisible hand,” who decides which questions get asked, and who gets to ask them, who finds out the answers, and who gets to own them?” Azer writes.

Through the example of Dr. Thomas Stachel, of the University of Alberta, and his partnership with DeBeers, the South African diamond company, Azer wades through the large sea of information that surrounds corporate funding. “German-born Stachel arrived in Edmonton in September 2001 under the splendid title of the Canada Research Chair in Diamonds. He presumed the necessary funding for his laboratory accoutrements was awaiting his expenditure. It wasn’t,” explains Azer.

The lack of funding forced Stachel to seek it elsewhere. When the then-Students’ Union president Mike Hudema (cover of June 2010 issue of Alberta Views) caught wind of the deal he protested it on ethical grounds. “Despite the romantic images of its ‘diamonds are forever’ campaign, DeBeers has a record of human rights abuses, including support for South Africa’s apartheid regime, displacement of the Kalahari bushmen, and complicity in conflict diamonds [diamonds used to buy arms in wartorn countries],” says Hudema.

This is one of the complications that Azer explains is a by-product of corporate funding in academic research. Other negative effects are result skewing. For this she turns to Dr. Nancy Olivieri and her experience with corporate funding in medical research. Oliveri had agreed to perform a clinical trial for the generic drug company Apotex. “Initially results were positive, but Olivieri claimed her later results suggested the drug was neither safe nor effective,” Azer explains. When she attempted to communicate these concerns Apotex refused to acknowledge the results as anything but positive. She was told she could not disclose the information to anyone because of a clause in the agreement. She went public anyway.

“I would guess there are thousands of researchers who are being pushed into fudging their clinical trial data,” says Olivieri. “Not a week goes by that I don’t receive e-mails from medical researchers grappling with the gag-order culture of conducting clinical trials on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry.”

Azer explains that a 12.6 per cent increase in sponsorship funding had been accepted by Canadian universities in 2003 since the previous year. Sponsorships can have immense upsides to them, providing funding for employment and research that would otherwise not be available. The power that corporations have over research puts the fundamental nature of academia at risk. “The general consensus is that if current trends continue, research that does not attract the corporate eye will get left behind,” writes Azer.

An Intern-al Conclusion:

Where artists must worry about profitability, academics have to struggle daily with relevance. To be an academic, in a way, is to think beyond your time. There is a need to see passed what is current and to find solutions to future problems. There can be intense pressure to provide answers to questions that have not even been asked. Having an outside organization or company fund research is a form of validation for the minds asking the tough questions.

As I read my way through Alberta Views history it is becoming clear how many important issues exist outside the hot topics that frequently claim all the public attention. There has been an evolution through the years of this magazine, graphically and stylistically, but what is comforting is that it’s obvious the mandate has stayed the same. It’s focus on Albertans and issues that affect them has remained constant so no matter what issue I pick up I know that it will be relevant to my life. That is such a breath of fresh air in a world where mass media is all about sensationalism and what will cause the most waves, whether it is significant to the public interest or not.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For  information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

To read the issue mentioned in this article, click here and here.

Alberta Views Magazine celebrated its fifth anniversary in 2003. Over the past five weeks of our Twitter Campaign, I have read through five years of Alberta Views history. By reading one issue a week, I have learned that the magazine has produced deep, thought provoking articles about life in Alberta. Topics ranging from politics to gender equality to physical fitness, Alberta Views has managed to tackle all these issues with a clear and concise voice Albertans can trust.

Through our Twitter Campaign we hope to reach a total of 1,500 followers to celebrate fifteen wonderful years. You can tweet along with us, about your favourite articles or writers and have a direct line to a great magazine. Help us reach our goal! And learn about the magazine as I, the newest member of the AV staff learn about it too!

This week I explored the Mar/Apr issue of Alberta Views in 2003. The cover showed a bird’s eye view of the rows upon rows of temporary housing in Fort McMurray. The rows of housing look impersonal and lifeless and its cover line says “Gold Mine or Gulag?” Having never been to Fort McMurray or seen any real pictures of the industrial, I don’t know how to answer that question. When I started my internship in September, my brother also started a new job in Fort McMurray. He now lives in temporary housing that I imagine looks quite similar to the photo on the cover of this issue. It’s remarkable how, even 8 years after its publication date, the issue is still extremely relevant to Albertans across the province, myself included.

As children we are taught it’s not polite to talk of religion, politics and money. Sometimes I feel as though, at least in Alberta, this trio is really a quartet. The oil sands are our fourth conversational taboo. Perhaps this is because everywhere we look we are inundated with “information” about the industry. This information is often wildly conflicting. It is such a hot button issue in Alberta. Ok, maybe not just in Alberta. No matter where you are it’s always awkward when someone brings up the oil industry. So many families survive in this province because of it but it is perceived as a massively destructive force with regards to the environment. How are people supposed to reconcile the two and remain civil?

Freelance journalist, Dan Rubinstein’s 2003 article entitled “Heads in the Sands” a fresh perspective on life in Fort McMurray. Sure, his article acknowledges the oil sands but Rubinstein demonstrates another way to talk about the northern Albertan city. The article is focused on everyday life. He treats Fort McMurray like a community—not an oil field or a corporate site of corruption.

“Dads let sons drive the family SUV to weekend soccer games; moms apologize when their car alarms startle strangers. But Fort McMurray is also a hyperactive anomaly—a place of mass consumption, conformity and me-first bravado, of strip malls, drive-throughs and satellite dishes, a place where businesses and officials are scrambling to supply infrastructure the population requires.”

This sounds like an Alberta community in boom, pardon me, “rapid expansion.” I find it oddly disconcerting that Fort McMurray isn’t much different than other Albertan towns. After years of bad press, I had pictured a browning city with mud and garbage everywhere because the residents were too concerned with extracting oil on rigs than taking care of their surroundings. Instead there are lakes, forests, houses and full-time residents that have lived there happily for years. The contrast between what I was expecting and what Rubinstein describes is remarkable. (Especially considering an excerpt published in “Eye on Alberta” in our Decemeber 2011 issue that feeds this stereotype and unfavorably dubs Fort Mac as Fort McMordor…)

My earlier perception of Fort McMurray was that of a rough ‘n tumble town with drug and alcohol problems instead of a town of outdoorsmen who live life fully. So, it looks like Fort McMurray has an image problem. Hopefully if they decide to do a media campaign they will use pictures actually taken in the city. Alberta can’t weather another debacle like that.

The other problems, Rubinstein explains, are housing and crime, the byproducts of the nomadic lifestyles of a large portion of the residents. Since my brother has moved there, this transitory state has become even more apparent to me. As I see him being so transient, I can’t helped but project that life style onto his co-workers as well. His shifts last two weeks and he comes home whenever he can. This coming and going of temporary workers is precisely what Rubinstein believes is causing problems in the community. For example, he writes, “Because of oil patch salaries–$70,000, for example, to work at an oil sands plant—soft drugs like marijuana have given way to a budding cocaine and crack problem.” People don’t spend long enough in one place to become attached to their environment.

Since Rubinstein’s article was written eight years ago I don’t know how things have changed. His article has helped me to see passed the bad reputation of Fort McMurray and I now see a community struggling with the same problems as the rest of the province. With a new census coming out this spring new data may corroborate the problems expressed in his article. But, who knows? Maybe the city has found a way to cope with the coming and going of guys like my brother. Hopefully the data will show improvements on housing prices, better infrastructure and lower crime rates.

Sincerely,

Nicole (The Intern)

To read my previous blog posts, as well as others on the site, click here.

For  information on the Twitter Campaign and for the official rules click here.

To read the issue mentioned in this article, click here.

To read the issue featured in my next blog, click here.