March 15 FDA Research and Electoral Audit Training Session at the University of Calgary.

March 22 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of the following countries: Denmark, Finland, Cameroon, Venezuela, Argentina, Canada, USA, Mexico, Egypt (under Mubarak), and Tunisia (under Ben Ali).

The FDA’s evaluation and ranking of the 2008 Alberta Political Parties is an outside perspective of how Alberta citizens, candidates, parties, and individuals outside of the province, can view the 2008 Alberta General Election. Also, the evaluation process is an example of evaluating as an alternative to voting.

The FDA’s ranking of the Alberta Political Parties:

1. Wildrose Alliance (63.5%)

2. AlbertaLiberals (63.2%)

3. Social Credit (49.3%)

4. PCAlberta (43.6%)

5. Separation Party (43.1%)

6. Alberta’s NDP (41.8%)

7. Communist Party (26.8%)

8. Alberta’s Greens (20%)

9. Alberta Party (17.1%)

Actual election results:

Ridings/seats won:

1. PCAlberta 72

2. Alberta’s Liberals 9

3. Alberta’s NDP 2

% of Popular Vote:

1. PCAlberta 52.7%

2. Alberta’s Liberals 26.4%

3. Alberta’s NDP 8.5%

4. Wildrose Alliance 6.8%

5. Alberta’s Greens 4.6%

6. Other Parties 1.1%

Analysis:

There is clear discrepancy between the FDA’s results and that of the actual election.

The FDA study was an evaluation and ranking of the Alberta Political Parties’ policies based on the basic priorities of the Alberta public. The study was not a prediction or poll of how the Alberta public would vote.

Moreover, the FDA study was limited to the policies of the Alberta Political Parties. It did not evaluate, for example, the incumbency factor or party make-up including membership and leadership.

However, it is the position of the FDA that the political party policies should be a significant factor for how an individual votes. Hence, it is the conclusion of the FDA that the Alberta electoral process is flawed because Wildrose and Alberta’s Liberal had significantly better policies than PCAlberta, and yet the electoral results show no correlation to that.

Moreover, the low voter turnout of 41% in the Alberta election is another indication of a flawed, troubled political system. By factoring in the 52.7% popular support for PCAlberta, it means that PCAlberta has only the support of 21.6% of Albertans. Clearly, the party has a very weak mandate, and it is highly questionable that it represents the people of Alberta.

Is it the opinion of the FDA also that the incumbency factor of the PCAlberta party (in power since 1971), and the strength of the Alberta economy influenced a majority of those Albertans who voted in favor of PCAlberta. The saying, “if it ain’t broken, don’t fix it” applies to this election.

Though in reality, at least in terms of policies, the PCAlberta party was clearly not the better representative of the Alberta people. Therefore, it follows that the Alberta government policies including government expenditures, will not be the best for the Alberta people.

For example, the PCAlberta’s policy on royalty was vague and open to interpretation, its budget policy was limited in scope and lacked mention to fiscal responsibility, its health policy lacked scope and only dealt with equality of service, its education policy was narrow and dealt only with infrastructure and spaces, and lacked vision, its housing policy failed to acknowledge the provincial government part responsibility for the housing issue, and failed to deal with homelessness and rent increases, its environment policy was not comprehensive, and did not deal with environmental issues from the oil and gas industry and urban sprawl, and its democracy reform policy was non-existent.

In contrast, the Wildrose's royalty policy was unsound because it favored the oil and gas industry over the Alberta people, its budget policy was comprehensive and very specific, and laid great emphasis on fiscal responsibility and accountability; its health policy was great in scope and specifics in dealing with improvement and equality of Alberta healthcare, its education policy was the most comprehensive and specific proposal on improvement of Alberta education, its housing policy lacked any concrete proposals, barring a commitment to investigate the housing issue, its environment policy was more comprehensive than PCAlberta, and its democracy reform was comprehensive and very specific.

Also, the AlbertaLiberals' royalty policy was more vague than PCAlberta and open to interpretation, its budget policy was limited in scope, did not address fiscal responsibility and fairness, and was less specific than PCAlberta, its health policy was greater in scope and more specific than PCAlberta, its education policy was very comprehensive, though less specific than PCAlberta, its housing policy had very goods ideas on the housing crisis, acknowledged provincial government responsibility, and very specific, its environment policy did not address environmental impact of the oil and gas sector and urban sprawl, and the policy was specific, and its democracy reform policy was comprehensive and specific, but nothing on directly empowering Alberta citizens.

PCAlberta received 52.7% of the popular vote and 72 of 83 legislature seats, and a score of 43.6% on policies.

Wildrose Alliance received 6.8% of the popular vote and no legislature seats, and a score of 63.5% on policies.

AlbertaLiberals received 26.4% of the popular vote and 9 of 83 legislature seats, and a score of 63.2% on policies.