"Reading about his phone calls to critics leaves me thinking he didn’t really understand how angry physicians were; he wanted to try to bring them around."
Is this a theme with the UCP? The responses I've received from our MLA to questions, or what I thought were straightforward objections, are generally two or three page letters explaining what's wrong with my position, and if I could only look at things from the MLA's perspective, I'd be able to see what the issue is about. I think this is weird, and I'm not even a doctor.
I think a lot of that is just prepared talking points as they don't know how else to respond. Shandro is a different case--he sent an email out to all of AHS after a report listed cuts, and the tone was gleeful at the opportunity to save money, rather than something like "I know some of these changes will create challenges, but I am confident in our ability to solve these issues together" or some such.
Any professional should adhere to the standards of the regulating body so long as they advertise themselves to be practicing and in good standing. This is regardless of any foray into politics. This should be expected of engineers, lawyers, doctors, etc.
Politics is ugly. It's getting uglier by the day. With politicians, there seems to be double standards. It has been this way, especially in Alberta, for a very long time. It's enabled by the electorate. They don't stop it. It's not getting better. In Alberta, people vote based on patterns, their emotions, family history of voting, and without using their heads. In Alberta, for a very long time, the conservatives were allowed to do all kinds of very pricey shenanigans, conflict of interest breaches, and other bad things, and it has been allowed to continue. The electorate turns a blind eye to it, and acts like nothing has happened. When it comes to other governments, such as the federal government, doing a fraction of the blunders that happen in Alberta, under the provincial government, which are far less of a cost, the electorate in Alberta goes ballistic, and wants heads to roll. It's just very strange.
I am trying to put this chapter behind me. However, I was not shouting at the minister in the hallways. I was reading a prepared statement loud enough to be heard over the crowd. It’s difficult to “yell” a prepared statement. Further, I was compelled to attend this hearing. I was never part of submitting the complaint. And, I did not take this to social media during or after the hearing.
"Reading about his phone calls to critics leaves me thinking he didn’t really understand how angry physicians were; he wanted to try to bring them around."
Is this a theme with the UCP? The responses I've received from our MLA to questions, or what I thought were straightforward objections, are generally two or three page letters explaining what's wrong with my position, and if I could only look at things from the MLA's perspective, I'd be able to see what the issue is about. I think this is weird, and I'm not even a doctor.
I think a lot of that is just prepared talking points as they don't know how else to respond. Shandro is a different case--he sent an email out to all of AHS after a report listed cuts, and the tone was gleeful at the opportunity to save money, rather than something like "I know some of these changes will create challenges, but I am confident in our ability to solve these issues together" or some such.
Any professional should adhere to the standards of the regulating body so long as they advertise themselves to be practicing and in good standing. This is regardless of any foray into politics. This should be expected of engineers, lawyers, doctors, etc.
Politics is ugly. It's getting uglier by the day. With politicians, there seems to be double standards. It has been this way, especially in Alberta, for a very long time. It's enabled by the electorate. They don't stop it. It's not getting better. In Alberta, people vote based on patterns, their emotions, family history of voting, and without using their heads. In Alberta, for a very long time, the conservatives were allowed to do all kinds of very pricey shenanigans, conflict of interest breaches, and other bad things, and it has been allowed to continue. The electorate turns a blind eye to it, and acts like nothing has happened. When it comes to other governments, such as the federal government, doing a fraction of the blunders that happen in Alberta, under the provincial government, which are far less of a cost, the electorate in Alberta goes ballistic, and wants heads to roll. It's just very strange.
Smart. This piece ends very well.
I am trying to put this chapter behind me. However, I was not shouting at the minister in the hallways. I was reading a prepared statement loud enough to be heard over the crowd. It’s difficult to “yell” a prepared statement. Further, I was compelled to attend this hearing. I was never part of submitting the complaint. And, I did not take this to social media during or after the hearing.
Thank you for this clarification, and I apologize for creating an incorrect impression. I will revisit the wording of that statement.
Otherwise, I appreciate this article