Print Page   |   Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Sign Up
Young's Stuff
Blog Home All Blogs

Federal Lobby and National Insurance Education Standards—Strength in Unity

Posted By Thom Young, June 10, 2016

A Report from the Capital


This past week I participated for the first time in the annual Insurance Brokers Association of Canada lobbying efforts in our nation’s capital. Once again, we focused on maintaining the status quo in the upcoming parliamentary review of the Bank Act. Currently, banks are able to compete with brokers so long as they separate their insurance operations from their banking operations. Under the current regulations, they are restricted from offering insurance products out of their branches and restricted from advertising their banking products with their insurance products. The Bank Act comes up for review every five years, and the influence peddlers called lobbyists work very hard to convince the lawmakers to produce regulations that favour their competing business plans and interests.

This year, the task is particularly onerous for both sides of the argument. Last year’s election results produced the largest turnover of MPs in several decades, so many of them are receiving these messages for the first time. This freshness can be an advantage as these people are just as diverse as our population. While you may think that their political stripes set the baseline for their opinions, I have found in my years of talking with political representatives that most are willing to hear you out and listen to your thoughts on the topics. Granted, they may have preconceived opinions. Nonetheless, most are doing their best to learn about the issues while finding out what being a representative of the people is actually all about. Getting to talk with newly elected members of parliament is a golden opportunity to present a good case for your cause that will not only influence their perspectives but will also stimulate discussions and debate within their caucus. The challenge to get an effective message on behalf the insurance industry to these people is coordinated by IBAC and delivered by volunteers from insurance broker associations from all across our country.

This year, we had nine people on task from Alberta and were very well received by everyone we met. Our message was brief and concise: our concern continues to be that, if banks and other credit-granting institutions are allowed to retail insurance from their branches, the public will be unfairly coerced into the purchase of insurance products. If the products are offered at the same time a loan is granted, the inference that the loan is conditional on acceptance of other services deters consumers from assessing the comparative value of the product for their circumstances and puts the insurer at an unfair advantage. If the bank doesn’t directly sell the products required to mitigate its loan risk, then consumers (or their brokers) are more motivated to shop for the best product. Since 1991, the banks have been restricted from selling insurance products from their branches, and the evidence shows the consumers well served by a competitive insurance marketplace. We’d like to see that competition continue.

My personal observations of the process were very positive. I’ve been to the Hill more than a dozen times in my life: as a child, a student, a soldier, and often just as a tourist. I recall a visit with my grandfather when I was very young. He was good friend of John Diefenbaker, and I was given what I thought of then as a very boring tour of the place by these two old fellows. I still recall some significant insights imparted to me then that remain in my mind today, especially the point that this is the people’s house and no part of it should ever be unavailable to the people. While some of our freedoms have been necessarily impeded as a result of the need for security (as evidenced by the bullet holes in parts of the building), parliament remains a very open place available to anyone willing to suffer the indignities of the countless security check points. I’m not really complaining about security though. The only downside of the lobbying was the amount of walking needed get to the appointments. It seemed we would just finish a meeting in the Justice building on the west side of the Hill and the next one would be at the East Block and then back to Justice. The timing and location was dictated by the people we were meeting with and not scheduled with our convenience in mind. Accordingly some 14 or more kilometers were recorded in the process by my group.

I found all of the MPs we met with to be interested and glad for the information we imparted. I was most impressed with the Senators we met. As to the issues and our concerns, they very much aware of the discussions and asked the most intelligent questions. Perhaps I’ll have to rethink my opinion of this institution as it does appear that good work is done by many of them regardless of the aberrations that we constantly hear about in the media. Recent changes to the manner in which the Senate works were also explained to me, and I was genuinely convinced that these people want to fulfill their constitutional obligations. Now they are freed from the yoke of political affiliation, they may well able to live up to their intent. Perhaps that’s a topic for a future issue.

Outside of our issues, many of the MPs we met with enlightened us with the concerns of their constituents. I was asked many questions about the impact of the assisted-dying legislation on the life-insurance business. Of topical concern, of course, were the recent fire losses in Fort McMurray. Most of the people we were talking with are following the media coverage. Expiry of the mass evacuation coverage was mentioned several times, as was the industry’s response to the proposed rezoning that would restrict rebuilding in certain areas in order to secure a proper fire break. We able to answer most of the questions, although they showed that much confusion still exists. Flood coverage was raised in almost every encounter we had. Many wanted to discuss the challenges in coverage variances and availability where it’s needed. These discussions left little doubt that our industry and what we do is very important to these people!

Hill Day was a great experience and, if you ever get a chance to go, don’t miss it. The strength and power of participating in a national association is an awesome thing to experience. Meeting with other brokers and discussing the common issues that concern us bonds us with a purpose. While we all compete with each other as we sell insurance, we also face the same disrupters to our business. As a group, our voice is loud and clear. Individually, we have only local influence that won’t protect us from the national challenges we share.


On the Topic of National Standards, What about Education?


Insurance is insurance is insurance, right? I think I could walk into an office in any country in Europe, build on the knowledge I have obtained in my years as an insurance professional, and find myself in very short order apprised of the small differences in the wordings or intent of the coverage offered to the public. I know I can read an insurance policy from England or the U.S. and interpret the coverages and limitations provided by it. In my career, I have completed the review of a number of different wordings originating in other countries that have become available in our Canadian market. I know I can determine in short order the differences in automobile coverage between all the Canadian jurisdictions and provide an overview to clients that would be sufficient for their understanding, albeit limited by the short notice. Where I don’t know the differences in coverage between Alberta and anywhere else, I can find them out quickly and report them accurately. I know I’m not special or different from many other insurance professionals who have not only acquired the body of knowledge needed to answer questions but also acquired the ability to learn and report on topics about our craft. We are always learning and, even without the regulatory requirement to demonstrate an effort each year, those of us who wish to remain competitive spend much more time learning to respond to our markets’ need for answers to questions than we are ever accredited with CE credits.

For a couple of years now, as a member of the General Insurance Council of Alberta (GIC), I’ve been working on educational issues and reviews of educational materials. It was determined a number of years ago that the licensing examinations had fallen behind and were not testing on changes in forms and coverages in use in our industry and that, with the regulatory changes in Alberta providing for three different levels of licenses, new examinations had to be prepared to address the expected Level 2 and Level 3 hierarchy of knowledge. The consequent changes proved to disrupt the process of getting people licensed as Level 1 agents and advancing them to Level 2. As a result, industry pressure on the regulator saw both the materials used to study for the exams and the questions used in the exams reviewed, reworked, and adjusted. The process is a long one involving competing educational interests and the mandate of the regulator to ensure the public is well served by intelligent and proficient general insurance brokers. The issue was not just that the exams were too hard. The study material has also been challenged as perhaps inadequate.

The process of reviewing the material used to study for the exams, preparing curriculum design documents, and preparing new exam questions that match the new curriculum has been underway for quite some time. The educators are still adjusting their course material so their students are well prepared for the exams. The process isn’t over yet but is well underway. My intent here is not to focus on this progress but to comment on the standards and, in particular, the criticism that the standards set by the Insurance Institute courses and the CAIB program are not relevant.

For quite some time now I’ve been trying to track down the origin of these challenges, and I’m distressed to learn that most of it seems to be coming from our sister association members of IBAC who have their own educational programs and who apparently see themselves as competing with the national program. They believe that the national program is lacking in content and in need of an update. Granted, our GIC committee’s very thorough content review of both the CAIB program and the CIP program did find a number of parts in need of updating, but we also found in both programs that the material referenced in the curriculum design documents (the content informing the examination questions for the license levels) was all adequately covered, with the exception of the specifics of automobile insurance in Alberta.

This discontent with the national education programs concerns me greatly. The influence it has with regulators in other provinces filters into our communication with our and other regulators through the Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators and, in particular, into our communication with the Western Provinces Council of Insurance Regulators. The view that the national programs in place are lacking and insufficient both to learn from and measure equivalencies to the licensing standards has created havoc. As you may remember from a blog many months ago, our committee presented its work on equivalencies to the GIC, which recommended to our government that CIP and CAIB designation holders be granted equivalencies for each level of licensing in Alberta. The response from our regulator has been to tell us it may take a year or more before the government will address this issue. Reasons for the delay include the change in government, among other similar issues, but I have also been informed that the validity of the equivalencies is being questioned at the interprovincial meetings of the regulators.

I find it very strange that any provincial entity would want to undermine the validity of a national program provided by its parent association. Certainly, provincial qualification and licensing courses that meet the burden of content for passing a provincial examination are valuable, but the value of a professional designation that has national recognition can’t be discounted. Do we want to see the letters showing our professional achievements suffixed in brackets with our provincial abbreviation? I don’t. Where a provincial association sees a part of the national program in need of review or update, the inclination should be to fix it and to see the nominal cost of that fix as a contribution to betterment of the profession, not an inconvenience caused by the national organization’s failure to get it done in as quick a fashion as desired. For the record, the CIP and CAIB programs are constantly under review, and volunteers like me are actively involved in rewriting the parts that need updating. Don’t let anyone tell you that process isn’t ongoing—it is!

In Closing


I may be stepping on a few toes with this issue. It’s been a while since I took on as controversial a topic as this, but I am saddened to see our lack of unity. It devalues the status of those of us who have put in the time and effort to get a professional designation that, through the national efforts of IBAC, is recognized from Vancouver to St. John’s as a standard of excellence in the delivery of General insurance! We also look like a bunch of kids arguing in a candy store when the regulators meet to deal with our issues.

The opinions expressed in this blog are not necessarily those of IBAA.
Comment on this post below or email Thom Young privately. Thom also encourages suggestions for topics.

 

Tags:  assisted-dying legislation  Bank Act  building codes  CAIB  Canadian Council of Insurance Regulators  credit-granting institutions  evacuation coverage  flood  Fort McMurray fire  General Insurance Council  Hill Day  IBAC designations  licensing courses and exams  Licensing Level 1  Licensing Level 2  Licensing Level 3  life insurance  property coverage  Senate reform  Western Provinces Council of Insurance Regulators  zoning bylaws 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Climate Effects on Insurance Stability, Distracted Driving Continues, National Tissue and Organ Donation, Canadian Senate Tragedy

Posted By Thom Young (Full first name: Thomas Clifford John), April 27, 2016

Climate Change Effects on Insurance Stability

In my recent musings through the industry press, I came across an interesting article on climate change entitled “The Earth’s Temperature Has Just Shattered the Thermometer.” Why the insurance industry in particular hasn’t gotten on board with the current flavour of the debate on global warming or, as we’ve come to hear it called now, climate change has always been a mystery to me.

I occasionally hear a smidgen of concern from underwriting gurus and the odd senior executive for the belief that climate change is going have a huge impact on the earth, but there really hasn’t been a full-blown united expression of belief that dire consequences will come about if action isn’t taken immediately to reverse the effects of human influence on the earth’s climate. In my private discussions with a number of senior people in our industry, a nagging doubt persists about the causal relation of human beings to climate change. Often the science of climate change itself is doubted. Some point out that the historic and geological records display wide swings in climate around our globe and that archeological records during human habitation show long periods of cooling and warming in unidentifiable cycles with indeterminable causes. With little consensus on what actually happened, scientists themselves speculate on what caused the last ice age to occur and what caused it to end.

The insurance perspective is unique. In our business, predictive cycles are critical to the success of our enterprise. We share and mitigate loss risks. Actuarial analysis is a predictive science. Assumptions about future events are based on historical data, and those predictions are adjusted by applying variables such as changes in climate, demographics, or even chance. The insurance analysis can get very complicated and inexact, for example, integrating variables such as ethnicity, cultural behaviour, DNA analysis, and the now-mapped human genome. Definitive conclusions are not necessary in actuarial analysis to allow for their possibility and calculate the mathematical probability. (Thinking about such calculations, I’m glad I decided to be a broker, rather than an actuary. Several times in my insurance career, I’ve listened to actuaries debate the validity of their calculations. I have always come away from those meetings with a great degree of confusion—and a throbbing headache.) Thus the divergent views on climate change may be irrelevant to an insurance-based risk analysis.

Regardless, I take exception to the claim in the above article that the effects of global warming may bankrupt our business. Hogwash! Long before our well-capitalized and reserved guarantees would not be honoured, the whole financial sector would need to have collapsed. If anyone is concerned about such a potential collapse, I’ll bet I could find some insurance executives to support increased rate surcharges to build special reserves for that purpose. The thing is, though, the surcharge would have to be shared by all market participants, so the regulator would have to mandate it. In the political realm, I think the science needs to be a little more exact.

As I am finishing up this piece, my morning newsfeeds contain this dire warning:

UN Calls for Long-Term Climate Stability
The world faces even greater catastrophic weather incidents unless leaders vow to go further to cut greenhouse gas emissions. The head of the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction is today (Apr. 21) calling for signatories of the Paris Agreement to go beyond existing commitments.

“It is clear that weather and climate are implicated in 90% of major disaster events attributed to natural hazards. Droughts, floods, storms, and heatwaves have the potential to undermine many developing states’ efforts to eradicate poverty. Climate change is adding to pre-existing levels of risk fuelled by exposure and socio-economic vulnerability,” Robert Glasser said.

He called for the more than 160 countries that have signed the Paris Agreement to “scale up the level of ambition” to cut emissions or face the “real danger of being overtaken by the rapid pace of global warming.” (Insurance Business)


Let the political discussions begin.

Distracted Driving Continues Unabated

According to Sgt. Glenn Bangs, the number of distracted-driving tickets issued in Edmonton seems to increase year over year. Police in Edmonton say that “the worst offenders are people 33 to 44 years old.” In 2012, 4597 distracted driving tickets were issued in Edmonton, jumping to 5197 tickets in 2013, 5285 tickets in 2014, and 5928 tickets in 2015.

Statistics, damned statistics. Were exactly the same efforts made by the Edmonton police force each year? Likely not, but the statistics make a good angle for a story, don’t they?

Regardless, the anecdotal evidence on distracted driving finds most in agreement that the activity is not abating anywhere in any way. Either the increasingly severe penalties and increased efforts at enforcement seem not to deter the activity, or not enough time has been factored into assessing the result. Since January 1st, 2016, fines for this infraction in Alberta have increased to $287 and, more importantly, add three demerit points on the driver’s license. These demerits brings the activity into our realm, and now insurers are able to select against and charge for the increased risk that these people present. A whole calendar year or more will pass before the deterrent effect of these costs will be measurable.

I’ve always been on the fence on this subject, and I’m still looking for the statistical link between the activity and increased claims costs. So far, I’ve yet to see any unbiased assessment that supports such a claim. I’m not arguing that the activity is safe or that it should be allowed, just wryly observing that incidence of loss overall doesn’t support the conclusions of many.

Technology is available to limit the use of cell phones in automobiles. Perhaps, as with seat belts, such controls should be mandatory. Someone with three distracted-driving tickets in Alberta would owe nearly $1000 in fines and incur 9 demerit points, leaving the Facility as the only carrier willing to insure such a driver. The extra cost of installing limiting technology in such a person’s vehicle would look like a bargain in comparison.

Clearly, this debate must continue before a resolution to the problem will present itself. When I was a young lad, the largest distraction while operating a motor vehicle was drinking and driving. The rules weren’t very severe or enforced. Many didn’t believe it was a problem, and people who pronounced their proficiency at operating a motor vehicle after consuming considerable amounts of alcohol were unchallenged by the majority. Statistics and science proved them wrong, and the social rules that allowed for drinking and driving started to change. The seriousness of the act and the carnage it produced became a significant social issue that produced stronger and more effective penalties and intolerance for the activity to the extent that effective enforcement is now the norm and the results life changing. We will continue to monitor this issue closely.

National Tissue and Organ Donor Week

If you attended an Alberta Registry Office last week, you may have noticed that the clerks were wearing a lanyard to bring attention to the need for organ and tissue donors in Canada. The Alberta Registry Association has undertaken this cause to promote donor registration in the Alberta. The voluntary process for collecting the permission of Albertans to donate their organs and tissues is woefully inadequate to the need. Currently, 120,000 people are on waiting lists for transplants, and that number seems only to be rising. The simple act of registering to make this huge humanitarian contribution takes only a minute and can end up giving the gift of a healthy life to someone living on the edge of finality or with the limitations of an easily corrected disability. Please make this a topic for discussion in your household. It costs you nothing and improves the community around you. When you next visit a Registry Office for any service, consider asking for assistance in registering yourself for this donation. You can even do it now yourself at MyHealth.Alberta.ca.

I believe that donation consent should be implied, meaning that approval is implied unless someone registers to opt out. People would then be required to make an effort to register their objection and to think about the donation. Tens of thousands of people would be removed from waiting lists and receive the simple procedures that would improve their lives. In a perfect world, everything would be perfect, wouldn’t it? Do have this discussion. It is important!

The Senseless Tragedy of the Canadian Senate

One of the most controversial articles I’ve written, as measured by the reader response, was my observations on the Duffy trials and tribulations. My point regarding the unnecessary existence of the Red Chamber in the workings of our Canadian parliamentary system brought a number of comments about the sober second thought envisioned by Sir John A. MacDonald, the need for an unbiased review to restrain the mob of democracy, and the belief that an august group of esteemed Canadians could bring some influence upon political realities. I responded to these writers by observing that the current structure of our senate meets none of the desires envisioned for it and that, without any political will to fix the problem, perhaps the senate could be done away with by a consensus. Well, that demolition is not likely in my lifetime.

The declaration by the judiciary that senator Mike Duffy has been found innocent of all charges brought against him is not a declaration that his actions were moral, just, or even wrong, but one that reinforces the wanton abandon of accountability to the people of all the senators in our Canadian senate.

I predicted that Mike Duffy would not be convicted of the charges brought against him. Political pandering and media circus aside, there was never any inkling of any rules broken or laws broken. The legal review affirmed that no expense rules existed to begin with. Mr. Duffy can now expect to be reinstated in good standing to his position and fully reimbursed for any holdbacks on his compensation and expenses. Likely a jig will be danced, particularly by those who were waiting to see if any charges might be brought against them for similar claims. In the end, the shame of it all is that the cost of all of these proceedings, including Mr. Duffy’s defence costs, will be borne by the Canadian taxpayer. No doubt though, the shame will neither be great enough nor the cost absurd enough to stimulate any action to correct the deficiencies!

In Closing

Once again, with the wonderful spring we’re having, watch for the two-wheelers on our roads and highways. Look twice. The most common accident between a car and a motorcycle occurs when the car turns in front of the biker. The first thing car drivers always say is that they didn’t see the biker. The truth is that they weren’t looking for them.

The opinions expressed in this blog are not necessarily those of IBAA.
Comment on this post below or email Thom Young privately. Thom also encourages suggestions for topics.

 

Tags:  actuarial analysis  catastrophic risk  climate change  distracted driving  organ and tissue donation  regulation risk management  senate reform  senator Mike Duffy 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 

Western Economic Drive, Senate Reform, Alberta Rodeos

Posted By Thom Young, June 19, 2015
Updated: June 18, 2015

Go West, Young Man, Go West


This phrase originated in the U.S. in the early 1800s and is credited to various individuals giving advice to young people about seeking a better future in the land of opportunity. Doubtless, this was good advice for many during those times. Eastern cities were struggling under the crush of their population growth, and business opportunities were limited by the dominance of large corporations manipulating the capital for growth. Economic policies in place caused severe cycles of boom and bust development, and the standard of living for city dwellers was limited at best. North America was simply the storage house for European economic interests, and little in the way of finished products were manufactured for anything other than domestic use. “Hewers of wood and drawers of water” is the economic description of the mercantilism that controlled economic development in this new land. The farther you went away from the dominance of business interests represented in the Eastern cities, the better your prospects of developing an independent enterprise that allowed you to grow your capital value with the development of new towns and cities. These opportunities especially presented themselves in the West.

I know in my family history, the idea of exploring new opportunities has always been seen as an adventure. The German-English word Wanderlust roughly translates to a thirst for adventure. Those who seek such things are natural risk takers with deep-seated optimism. A letter written by one of my ancestors in the late 1700s talks of the journey to “the Canadas” and the seven-week sailing that had them becalmed for two weeks off the coast of Newfoundland, in sight of land with no means of getting to it. They finally made it to Quebec City where they disembarked from the ship and boarded a steam boat to Montreal. The steam boat exploded on the journey with over 400 lives lost and only three of the seven in my family’s party surviving. Still, after somehow making it to Montreal, they continued on to what is now the Kitchener-Waterloo area of Ontario and staked property to build a new life. That farm did well until the last of that generation passed in the early 1900s. The next generation left in the early 1880s repeating the westward movement to new land and opportunities near Neepawa, Manitoba, again staking out the land and working it to support a large family. My great-great grandfather William Forrest Young was an insurance broker and real estate agent who went on to become a scion in Canadian finance. On his retirement from the corporate world, he homesteaded once again at Russell, Manitoba, where he passed in 1935, leaving a large family to wrestle with the estate, nothing of which was left when my turn came up.

For my first visit as an adult to Calgary, the bank I was working for decided I could improve my sales skills by attending the Xerox PS II course held in the Calgary offices of Xerox Canada. My boss and I were both sent, likely because he didn’t want to be upstaged by the new guy who actually had some sales experience. While I learned a lot about financing from this guy, he would fail at selling cold water in the desert. The course was a good one but, like all of the bank courses, the study was combined with much socializing. I remember one of the places we ended up at was the East End Petroleum Club, which was in a corner of a rather seedy hotel. There I was introduced to a young fellow named Ralph whom people (I thought) jokingly called the mayor. I was amused to find out at some later date that he actually was the mayor of Calgary and was further amused to learn that at this rather unusual luncheon gathering I had been introduced to much of the business elite in Calgary. This was 1980—the bust cycle of our resource development had just begun. Calgary was really a cow town then, but it had a strange optimism about the future. Native Calgarians were hard to find, and the large group of people from many different places, all chasing the dream, refused to be swayed from their belief in this promised land, no matter what the economic indicators and Eastern prognosticators had to say. I was strangely convinced of this too and determined that someday I would follow that dream and see what opportunities I could find. It took us almost seven years to get back to Calgary, but we haven’t looked back since. Alberta has been good to us and will continue to be so. As my departed friend “the mayor” put it, the West is where it is happening, and the Alberta Advantage is making certain that we are leading the way into the 21st century!

I was recently reading a Forbes magazine article on employment opportunities. While the article references the U.S. economic conditions, the economic makeup of our country has little difference, and the conclusion the article draws about the best opportunities being in the West is likely just as accurate for Canada. The centre of power and population influence continues to shift westward. This shift will produce a very interesting reality in the coming decade, especially with the movement of the political spectrum that we are now seeing.

Does Our Canadian Senate Continue to Demonstrate Its Irrelevance?


Of all the meanderings I’ve written, the most number of items hitting my inbox came from a short bit that I wrote about the Canadian Senate when the Duffy expense scandal first became news. I commented then that the Senate, this unrepresentative left-over from the British parliamentary system made to parallel the British House of Lords, made no sense to me, and I was stead firm in the belief that Canada would be better served by either making it an elected and accountable institution or by doing away with it all together. As we see in the ongoing reports of ineptitude and outright fraud in the audit of their financial workings, senators cut from whichever political party are equally inept in their dealings with public money. Despite the stinging review, no method seems to be in place to correct the deficiencies or to demand these people be held to account for the theft of public funds either through willful intent or ignorant understanding.

Canadian Senate-Red ChambersUnlike the British House of Lords, which was established to appease landed gentry in the transition to democracy, our Canadian senators are appointed at the whim of the leader of the country at any given time. The thought was that this group would be made up of the most qualified of the Canadian elite in academic and business endeavours and would provide a slow, determined review of parliamentary decisions and make recommendations to benefit the process. Right from the very start, however, the “Red Chamber” became populated by political hacks rewarded for their service to whichever political power controlled their appointment. The provision of sober second thought in review of legislation was never effectively accomplished, and those in the know can confirm that historically the activities of the members of this group as whole rarely met the standards for honesty and integrity that we expect from the lowest elected official. This review of these senator’s expenses has clearly shown that, no matter which side is represented or who appointed them, the unabashed consumption of whatever can be scooped out of the public trough has gone on unchecked for decades and that the prospects for correction of the deviant behaviour will continue unabated until such time as Senate reform makes its way onto the agenda of Canadian concern. Unfortunately, Senate reform falls under the heading of constitutional reform and as such puts in play the competing interests of the provinces and the federal government with the demands for change and compensation unrelated to the discussion. The current government cannot be anymore blamed for the Senate’s ineptitude than any previous one, nor does it have any desire to reopen the divisive constitutional debate that would be required to effect changes. Who could blame them considering the total failure of previous attempts for unanimity? Let us all remember that the last successful attempt to amend the Canadian constitution resulted in appeasement and compromise by way of a notwithstanding clause providing a provincial entity the right to opt out of the unanimous provisions of the group or even the legal determination of the highest courts in the land. Simply comprehending that discourse is enough to confuse and annoy, yet it is where we sit with this discussion.

I would leave you with the thought that the next round may well have to come from the provinces, not the federal government. Canadians would have to demand action from their provincial leaders to deal with these matters. To quote my dear departed Nana on this matter, “It will be a long row to hoe!”

Off to the Rodeo


A sure sign that the summer months are here in Alberta is that the rodeo and chuck wagon circuits have begun. I have made the trek to Ponoka to secure the best parking site for my RV so we have a short walk to the rodeo grounds and are far enough away from the redneck party group to enjoy our evenings. The weather is starting out pretty normally with the looming possibility that the High River show will be rained out but the Ponoka rodeo will go on rain or shine. If you’re going look for us at the grounds, I’ll be the guy wearing the cowboy hat!

The opinions expressed in this blog are not necessarily those of IBAA.
Comment on this post below or email Thom Young privately. Thom also encourages suggestions for topics.

Tags:  economics  rodeo  Senate  Senate reform  Western Canada 

Share |
PermalinkComments (0)
 
more IBAA Courses and Events

2017-10-23
Lethbridge Local Council Errors & Omissions

2017-10-24
Solid Fuel Heating Appliances- An Insurance Perspective

Featured Members

Membership Software Powered by YourMembership  ::  Legal