To me, voting is exciting because it’s an opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Yawn, right? Wrong.

The Douglas Park By-election is shaping up to be a hot race, and ReginaStreets is on the trail. September 21, 2009 is voting day, and we’ll be following with a watchful eye on the candidates. Stay tuned

Saskatchewan is projecting a $1.3 billion drop in potash revenues this fiscal year but still hopes to post an overall budget surplus.To deal with the shortfall the government says it will take a $185 million dividend from the Crown Investments Corporation and delay funding the Children’s Hospital in Saskatoon and some schools.

Compare and contrast that to the LeaderPost’s coverage of the potash shortfall…

Then there’s unexpectedly higher revenue of $668 million from oil, taxes and federal transfers, which covers half the potash revenue shortfall. Gantefoer will make up the rest through accounting measures like taking a $185 million dividend from the Crown corporations and by deferring $132 million in capital projects still in the planning stages. That doesn’t mean the Saskatoon Children’s Hospital has been cancelled, as some critics suggest; the money will be there once construction begins.

Two media sources, two dramatically different stories.  The Canadian Press take on the potash shortfall calls to mind images of sick kids standing on the streets saying, “We don’t have a children’s hospital in Saskatchewan.”  The Leader-Post version spares us that rage-inducing image.    Why is there a disparity here?

The first idea that springs to mind is the fact that the Canadian Press is a pretty bad source for a story of this complexity.  The Saskatchewan Party is making up the lost revenue through a creative use of accounting.  Essentially, they are going to report expenditures in different places and at different times.  For example, they are going to ‘take a dividend’ from the Crown Investments Corporation.  Rather than let the Crown Investments Corporation report those assets, the province is going to report them in its own financial statements.  And, they are going to ‘defer capital expenditures’ (like the Children’s Hospital).  Defer does not mean ‘cancel’, it means ‘enter it later.’

This brings up an interesting question.  Politicians have been using accounting measures to improve their financial results for several years.  Creative accounting cuts all across party lines.  Is this really acceptable?

Personally, I fall into the camp that suggests that government should use the most transparent accounting methods possible.  Deferring expenses and using journal entries to maintain projections seems a little bit questionable when applied to the public records.

What do you think?

 For instance, let’s say that you’re sitting at your computer when you hear a knock at your door. You get up, open the door and see a politician running in a local election. Now let’s say you’re sitting at your computer and you see that the same politician is following your twitter account, or has added you as a friend on Facebook; or maybe they made a comment on your blog. To which are you more receptive?

 Consider how great the influence of social media on the global political scale. There are several countries around the world that have placed grave restrictions on freedom of speech, the freedom of dissent, and on independent media and engaged citizens. Places that are currently in a state of social upheaval, but where people face restrictions in speaking out, are using social media as a way to get their voices heard. This is happening in China, Iran, Israel, North Korea, Palestine, Russia … even in Mongolia to a certain extent.

 In locations where government seeks to commit repugnant acts against its residents without impunity, social media is facilitating the circumvention of restrictions, once again giving rise to the voice of the populace – whose views are neither valued not wanted by oppressive regimes that seek to silence them.

 However, is this access to the world (through the internet) changing the ways in which governments act and create policy? To be continued…

Amir Javadifar, a student protester arrested on Jul 9th, died in prison. #iranelection http://bit.ly/XqsqH #Iran #g88

Messages like this are source material in the history of one of the most important fights of my generation.  They also speak to the power of social media.  The western world would not know that Amir Javadifar died in prison if not for social media.  And then there is the organizational power of the social sphere.The #iranelection hash tag is buzzing with calls for a general strike on August 5th (the day that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will be sworn in as leader).  It will be very interesting to watch what happens as the inauguration approaches!  If the western media cannot report what is happening in Iran, Twitter most certainly will.

I am very curious about what sort of impact services like Twitter will have upon foreign policy towards Iran.  How will foreign governments navigate through the confusing world of social media?  Will they be able to sift through all the lies, conjecture, and propaganda to find the threads of actionable truth?

But, I am even more curious about how future governments will behave in a social media dominated world.  What kinds of effects will the mass acceptance of social media have upon the future of activism?  As an example, consider the Chilean coup of 1973.  Augusto Pinochet converted the National Stadium in Santiago into a giant detention centre/house of torture immediately following the coup.  Would a government be able to engage in such a massive human rights abuse in a social world?  Will governments be able to keep mass genocide a secret anymore?

How will government behave in a web 2.0/3.0 world?

 I think that partisanship is both detrimental and ridiculous, in politics and in life. Take this magazine. Do I have to be on the left to talk about the causes and effects of poverty? Do I have to be on the right to have a strong corporate business model and believe in microdevelopment? Absolutely not.

The Regina Streets Magazine has always been staunchly non-partisan because we value the opinions of more than one ‘perceived’ side of a coin. To create better dialogue, debate, and most importantly, change – we must set aside the words and attitudes that partisanship embodies, and work together. I can only give purposeful effort, and hope that one day I’ll get the opportunity to work for this change together with you…

Now, to those of you new to Regina, our municipal elections are traditionally very entertaining.  Our politicians have a unique, very-Prairie, style of mudslinging and politicking.  And, never forget that some thoughts and beliefs trigger particularly odd forms of expression.  This election promises to be especially interesting since this will be the first municipal election in Regina since the phrase ’social media’ became part of mainstream vernacular.

This particularly excites me because, for me, the internet has always been about social media.  At their base level, internet protocols are incredibly social – they make it very easy for anyone to publish and share material.  Web 2.0 has been about putting those tools into the hands of all of us. But, on a philosophical level, there is no difference between Usenet and Twitter/Blogs/Facebook/etc.  The only difference is degree of accessibility.

So, needless to say, I am especially excited for this election because it will be fun watching political types try to use services like Twitter and Facebook for political ends.  Some really great practices will emerge, but there will also be some horrible errors.  My hope though is that merging municipal politics with the web will result in an entirely new kind of evolution.  I hope that adding back a social/entertainment appeal to Regina politics will usher in an era when  more Regina youth will demonstrate an interest in municipal politics.

“Here we are now, entertain us.” – Some Predictions

For fun, I’m going to make some election predictions…

• Pat Fiacco is going to win it.
• The Prairie Dog will clearly endorse someone other than Pat Fiacco.
• I won’t be able to put down the Leader-Post.  While I will forever miss the Bob Hughes, the Leader-Post is still a publication for serious political junkies.