Alberta Business Marketing

Today, Canada announced a tightening of the border with Mexico. Effective immediately tourists traveling from Mexico must hold a visa. The move by the Canadian Immigration minister , Jason Kenney late Monday, will be felt most acutely by the Canadian Tourism Industry. Visas were also re-applied to citizens entering Canada from the Czech Republic. Both decisions were based on a growing number of refugee claims.

Mexican tourism visits to Canada grew a healthy 8% in 2008. As Canada’s 5th largest source of International travelers to Canada this is a market that is significant. The move threatens to shut the taps on visits that are already planned for this summer. A 48-hour grace period for Mexicans with imminent travel expires at 10 p.m. ET Tuesday. After that, all bets are off.

“What really hurts about this is that there’s was no warning at all … and all of a sudden, basically the day the doors were supposed to open on the beginning of the peak season, they’re being shut in our face a little bit,” said Hume Rogers, of Ottawa’s Capital Hotel and Suites.

Rogers had 25 rooms booked for 10 days this month with a Mexican tour group.

The Canadian government chose early July to immediately enforce the new Visa measures, another dagger in the coffin of Canadian Tourism operators already suffering significantly from the economic slump and other tourism crises, not the least of which just came in effect June 1, 2009 in the United States. The Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative requires all US citizens to present passports or the equivalent document upon returning to the US for the first time ever. A 2005 survey of US border crossers showed just 35% of US border crossers to Canada had such documentation.

As a representative of the Canadian Tourism Industry, I am calling on the Conservative government to delay the visa requirement until year end, to allow our industry to cope with the change.

How do you feel? Call Stephen Harper’s office directly and voice your concern. Prime Minister’s office: 613-992-4211

Links:

• Canadian Press New Visa Requirements
• Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative
• Video at Northern Edge Algonquin features Mexican guests last summer

Tweet This

Tags: canada, economic development, mexico, news, visa
Posted in Alberta Business | | Comments Off

Watching Calgary City Council debate the ward boundaries for the 2010 election last night was one of the funniest moments I think I’ve seen in that hallowed chamber. I mean funny as in sad. Like a comedy of errors. A comedy of people so deep in trouble the only way out was to thoroughly embarrass themselves further.

It was a debacle for council to even keep straight what each motion was, whether it took eight or 10 votes to pass or reject it, and what the implications were for voting for or against that particular motion. At one point the mayor even apologized to members of the media awaiting their final decision for how convoluted the whole process was.

My favourite quote of the night could have been this one:

Mayor: “Is everyone clear on the question”. Several aldermen: “No!“

But instead it is from this exchange between Alderman John Mar and Mayor Bronconnier:

Ald. Mar: “It’s somewhat murky here.” Mayor: “Murky began months ago.”

Murky did indeed begin months ago when council decided they wanted to add one more direction to the returning officer’s mandate (a mandate first approved in 1990): keep five wards on the east side of Deerfoot Trail. (Why they couldn’t have thought of that six months earlier before they set her to work is beyond me.) Then things got really murky when council didn’t wait for her to do her job and decided to start drawing their own boundaries. A process called gerrymandering. You can read all my thoughts on how we got to this point here, here, here, and here.

I live tweeted the whole thing and you can follow that via the #yyccc hashtag on Twitter starting at about 8pm last night.

What were the results? Everything was thrown out. Council admitted failure, apologized to the returning officer and passed only minor boundary changes from the current ones.

Here are the new boundaries for 2010:
As silly as it all seems, I’m happy council admitted the error of their ways and made the best decision they could have given the mess they created for themselves.

What are the next steps however? That is the big question. There is some thinking that these changes MAY put the City in violation of the Municipal Governance Act but I don’t think it does. Taking a look at the council agenda attachment showing the deviation of population between each new ward, everything looks a-okay on that front too.

Either way, expect two major things to come out of this:

1. Expect a council policy to allow an outside group determine ward boundaries in the future, so council won’t get their fingers in the pie and make a mess of things like this again. This is pretty much exactly what they have done for determining their salaries and I think it has worked well. Ald. Farrell tried to pass a motion to this effect last night but as several members of council didn’t like her wording and 9:30pm was fast approaching, it was referred to administration to wordsmith and come back with a proposal in September.
2. The next major redistricting – which normally happens every nine years (2010 being the ninth year) – will probably happen in time for 2013 now. With more time available between now and then I fully expect council to explore the possibilities of increasing the number of aldermen to created a more fair balance of representation. And a more manageable workload. You can read my thoughts on this topic here.

Stay tuned. Hopefully the next steps will be more steady than the last ones.

Tags: Calgary, calgary city council, Dave Bronconnier, John Mar, Politics, Twitter
Posted in Alberta Business | | Comments Off

Watching Calgary City Council debate the ward boundaries for the 2010 election last night was one of the funniest moments I think I’ve seen in that hallowed chamber. I mean funny as in sad. Like a comedy of errors. A comedy of people so deep in trouble the only way out was to thoroughly embarrass themselves further.

It was a debacle for council to even keep straight what each motion was, whether it took eight or 10 votes to pass or reject it, and what the implications were for voting for or against that particular motion. At one point the mayor even apologized to members of the media awaiting their final decision for how convoluted the whole process was.

My favourite quote of the night could have been this one:

Mayor: “Is everyone clear on the question”. Several aldermen: “No!“

But instead it is from this exchange between Alderman John Mar and Mayor Bronconnier:

Ald. Mar: “It’s somewhat murky here.” Mayor: “Murky began months ago.”

Murky did indeed begin months ago when council decided they wanted to add one more direction to the returning officer’s mandate (a mandate first approved in 1990): keep five wards on the east side of Deerfoot Trail. (Why they couldn’t have thought of that six months earlier before they set her to work is beyond me.) Then things got really murky when council didn’t wait for her to do her job and decided to start drawing their own boundaries. A process called gerrymandering. You can read all my thoughts on how we got to this point here, here, here, and here.

I live tweeted the whole thing and you can follow that via the #yyccc hashtag on Twitter starting at about 8pm last night.

What were the results? Everything was thrown out. Council admitted failure, apologized to the returning officer and passed only minor boundary changes from the current ones.

Here are the new boundaries for 2010:
As silly as it all seems, I’m happy council admitted the error of their ways and made the best decision they could have given the mess they created for themselves.

What are the next steps however? That is the big question. There is some thinking that these changes MAY put the City in violation of the Municipal Governance Act but I don’t think it does. Taking a look at the council agenda attachment showing the deviation of population between each new ward, everything looks a-okay on that front too.

Either way, expect two major things to come out of this:

1. Expect a council policy to allow an outside group determine ward boundaries in the future, so council won’t get their fingers in the pie and make a mess of things like this again. This is pretty much exactly what they have done for determining their salaries and I think it has worked well. Ald. Farrell tried to pass a motion to this effect last night but as several members of council didn’t like her wording and 9:30pm was fast approaching, it was referred to administration to wordsmith and come back with a proposal in September.
2. The next major redistricting – which normally happens every nine years (2010 being the ninth year) – will probably happen in time for 2013 now. With more time available between now and then I fully expect council to explore the possibilities of increasing the number of aldermen to created a more fair balance of representation. And a more manageable workload. You can read my thoughts on this topic here.

Stay tuned. Hopefully the next steps will be more steady than the last ones.

Share/Save

Tags: Calgary, calgary city council, Dave Bronconnier, John Mar, Politics, Twitter
Posted in Alberta Business | | Comments Off

Watching Calgary City Council debate the ward boundaries for the 2010 election last night was one of the funniest moments I think I've seen in that haloed chamber. I mean funny as in sad. Like a comedy of errors. A comedy of people so deep in trouble the only way out was to thoroughly embarrass themselves further.

It was a debacle for council to even keep straight what each motion was, whether it took eight or 10 votes to pass or reject it, and what the implications were for voting for or against that particular motion. At one point the mayor even apologized to members of the media awaiting their final decision for how convoluted the whole process was.

My favourite quote of the night could have been this one:

Mayor: "Is everyone clear on the question". Several aldermen: "No!"

But instead it is from this exchange between Alderman John Mar and Mayor Bronconnier:

Ald. Mar: "It's somewhat murky here." Mayor: "Murky began months ago."

Murky did indeed begin months ago when council decided they wanted to add one more direction to the returning officer's mandate (a mandate first approved in 1990): keep five wards on the east side of Deerfoot Trail. (Why they couldn't have thought of that six months earlier before they set her to work is beyond me.) Then things got really murky when council didn't wait for her to do her job and decided to start drawing their own boundaries. A process called gerrymandering. You can read all my thoughts on how we got to this point here, here, here, and here.

I live tweeted the whole thing and you can follow that via the #yyccc hashtag on Twitter starting at about 8pm last night.

What were the results? Everything was thrown out. Council admitted failure, apologized to the returning officer and passed only minor boundary changes from the current ones.

Here are the new boundaries for 2010:
As silly as it all seems, I'm happy council admitted the error of their ways and made the best decision they could have given the mess they created for themselves.

What are the next steps however? That is the big question. There is some thinking that these changes MAY put the City in violation of the Municipal Governance Act but I don't think it does. Taking a look at the council agenda attachment showing the deviation of population between each new ward, everything looks a-okay on that front too.

Either way, expect two major things to come out of this:

1. Expect a council policy to allow an outside group determine ward boundaries in the future, so council won't get their fingers in the pie and make a mess of things like this again. This is pretty much exactly what they have done for determining their salaries and I think it has worked well. Ald. Farrell tried to pass a motion to this effect last night but as several members of council didn't like her wording and 9:30pm was fast approaching, it was referred to administration to wordsmith and come back with a proposal in September.
2. The next major redistricting - which normally happens every nine years (2010 being the ninth year) - will probably happen in time for 2013 now. With more time available between now and then I fully expect council to explore the possibilities of increasing the number of aldermen to created a more fair balance of representation. And a more manageable workload. You can read my thoughts on this topic here.
   

Stay tuned. Hopefully the next steps will be more steady than the last ones.

Tags: calgary city council, Dave Bronconnier, John Mar, Twitter
Posted in Alberta Business | | Comments Off

I tweeted about this and lots of people were asking for the full text of the mail sent to all UofC staff letting them know they were going to be reducing the workforce by 200 people. I know it is not politics, arts or marketing related but I figured my blog was the best way to make the text available.

Subject: [All-staff-l] Budget Update from the President

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

Budget Update

July 14, 2009

We are now about three months into the 2009-2010 fiscal year. This period has allowed us to appreciate fully our financial situation at the end of the 2008-2009 fiscal year and to evaluate the reasonableness of some of the assumptions we made in constructing the 2009-2010 budget.

We ended 2008-2009 with a $14.3-million deficit. In fact, because of the financial prudence exhibited by the University community, we actually spent $4.5 million less in university operations in 2008-2009 than we anticipated. So, where did the deficit come from? It stemmed primarily from the fact that we continued to fund the various activities supported by the University endowments—things like undergraduate and graduate scholarships and bursaries, salary support for professors, equipment and facilities upkeep—even though, as a result of poor market performance, the return on endowment funds did not provide sufficient monies to underwrite these expenses. This resulted in an additional $19 million charge on our operating fund.

What does this mean for our 2009-2010 budgets, the fiscal year we are currently in? As we have indicated in other budget messages, the first charge on our 2009-2010 budget is the $14.3 million needed to cover the previous year’s deficit. In addition, though, the 2009-2010 budget will also be adversely affected by the increase in the deficit in the Universities Academic Pension Plan (UAPP), itself a victim of poor market performance. This will result in the U of C having an additional $8 million expense to cover the UAPP liability in 2009-2010.

One way that we are mitigating these financial hits, as indicated in previous messages, is that the University is increasing enrolment in a planned and strategic way. Hitting our enrolment targets is key to our financial sustainability and will also help off-set the anticipated zero-percent base increases from the Province of Alberta in the years ahead. Notwithstanding the enrolment increase, the University is in a situation where we must make difficult decisions to ensure that we produce a balanced budget in 2009-2010 and into the future—something mandated by the province and the Board of Governors.

To balance the budget and also to continue to live up to the commitment to fund envelope carryovers, we are pursuing several strategic initiatives. First, we have reduced the 2009-2010 budget allocations by an average of three percent for all units and Faculties. This means continuing budget adjustments by Deans and other budget managers, but this is the reality of the dynamics of budgeting and resource allocation.

Second, as we have indicated in previous messages, a significant portion of the University budget, approximately 60 percent, pays for the salaries and benefits of our employees. Given this reality, there is simply no possibility of ensuring that a balanced budget, once achieved, is sustainable unless we reduce our number of support and academic staff. I anticipate that we will need to reduce our staff complement by up to 200 people by the fall of this year. There is likely to be additional staff and faculty reductions in the future. The number is not known now, but will depend on a whole set of factors such as future government grants, tuition levels, endowment performance and salary and benefit settlements.

No one makes a decision like this lightly, even knowing that the staff complement at the U of C is greater on a per student basis than our comparator G13 universities. The University will reduce its staff complement in as transparent and supportive manner as possible. Senior leadership, as well as your deans, department heads and managers, will share information as it becomes available and work to ensure that you are all informed about the reductions and the plans for your particular units and Faculties.

Third, we are vigorously pursuing the iS² Project to improve our support service delivery and to reduce operating expenses strategically with as little impact on operations as possible. Projects like iS²allow us to make differential, strategic choices rather than just applying an across the board cost reduction strategy. This project will help the University improve its business processes and internal controls and also reduce expenditures through initiatives such as standardization of service levels and preferred buying arrangements.

I wish that the budget news was better, but it is not. You will continue to hear from us regularly about initiatives—such as iS², capital projects like the co-gen facility that reduce utility costs and strategic enrolment increases—that reduce University costs and increase revenue, and in some cases allow us to deliver the University’s mission more efficiently than we did before.

Thanks for reading.

Harvey P. Weingarten

President

I don’t work at UofC but have several friends that do (including my wife) I hope this doesn’t affect any of them. But then again, knowing how Fine Arts has already been gutted in anticipation for the merging of the Arts faculties the majority of my friends probably find this as old news and not likely to affect them any further.

PS – And don’t even go there – my wife did not send me this email text. She was in a meeting. And I doubt she would have even if she could have. She’s prim and proper and works hard for the U. I cajoled someone else. Besides, they sent an email to all staff. If that is not making something public I don’t know what is. Plus I’m not sure if this is even really new news. It may just be the first I’m hearing about it.

Share/Save

Tags: Calgary, University of Calgary
Posted in Marketing | | Comments Off