Rob Bernshaw, Columnist, Pincher Creek Voice
In recent weeks the attitude of entitlement has reared its hydra like head many times in the media spotlight and court of public opinion.
This government currently on the slippery slope of entitlement has decided to bring out new rules and penalties to be imposed on proper\improper stewardship of our tax dollars. For example the new highly touted online expense posting for all to see in the public spotlight. With that being said our current Premier since being elected in March of 2008 has submitted her expenses during that time to the Legislature Library but not on the much touted online expense page.
In a press release to the public prior to the business\pleasure trip of our current Premier and entourage, to London, the whole cost of the trip would be approximately $83,000 dollars, so how did it manage to balloon to $518,000 dollars in a few short weeks while attending the 2012 Olympic games in London? This was because of the $123,000 savings incurred after the approximately $113,000 in the hotel room boondoggle. Where are the savings really? As this gets better every day it is almost laughable the extent this current government will go to to fulfill its entitlement role. It seems our tax dime is getting stretched pretty far these days. How much farther will it get stretched before it breaks?
Giving the benefit of the doubt the press release refers to total travel and accommodation costs for the Premier, two Ministers and three staff and does not refer to any other expenses or other money that would be spent.
In the relevant press release, is mentioning only the approximate travel and accommodation costs of this 2012 Olympic trip to London being fully transparent and open with us taxpayers?
Coupled with the following recent Alberta Health Services press release are the rules being changed as we rail against entitlement and poor stewardship of our precious tax dollars?: http://www.scribd.com/doc/108983965/Expenses-Audit
If as it seems the rules are being changed midstream to fit the agenda of the games initiator it brings us to the question.
What are rules?
Is the definition of rules the same as: What is the definition of normal?(a different meaning to different people)
Are rules made to be broken as the common adage suggests or are they a political gamble that gives the appearance of change?
Is a new era beginning for this government and the people of Alberta ruled under the current attitude of entitlement or is it the same old under a different title?
Many people have heard about or seen the excellent movie Rules of Engagement(ROE) a 2000 American film with an all star cast.
Possibly coming soon to a political theater near you(if not already there) is a new movie entitled: Rules of Entitlement(roe). This movie also has an all star cast portrayed by a school of Lake Mead Nevada and Arizona Carp, a satirical parody on entitlement. A comedy possibly representing events encountered in our everyday lives.
A link to the trailer has been provided for viewing and commentaries are encouraged:
Disclaimer: Any similarities to political figures past or present is purely coincidental and possibly due to individual interpretation in the mind of the readers, listeners and viewers.
In this column there are three different meanings of the letters r, o and e when put together in either an acronym format or as the word depicting the eggs of fish.
To help avoid and alleviate any possible confusion that may result from those three letters here are possible defintions taken from a couple of sources.
1.”Rules of Engagement(ROE): are rules, issued by competent authorities, that assist in the delineation of the circumstances and limitations within which military forces may be employed to achieve their objectives. ROE appear in a variety of forms in national military doctrines, including execute orders, deployment orders, operational plans, or standing directives. Whatever their form, they provide authorisation for and/or limits on, among other things, the use of force, the positioning and posturing of forces, and the employment of certain specific capabilities. In some nations, ROE have the status of guidance to military forces; in other nations, ROE are lawful commands
~Source: Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_engagement
The following possible definition is open to interpretation:
2: Rules of Entitlement(roe to avoid confusion with rules of engagement acronym ROE):
Issued by whim and made up as the circumstances warrant to cover up getting caught. What are the roe for people in official positions and holding public office as servants of the people whether elected or appointed? Are these rules possibly undefined rules of engagement with the public sector and the tax dollars provided?
Would the roe hold true for people in positions of trust in every organization or association on this earth today? Those questions and others probably need to be asked or the roe needs to be more clearly defined for the public to disseminate in a logical manner. Are the roe so ingrained into the society of today that representatives and stewards of our public funds do not even realize that their actions are not acceptable to the general public and have caused much consternation among people that hold common sense and logic in high regard. Is the roe a habit developed from too many years at the public trough or public wharf as the trailer depicts? Or is it part of the DNA and attitude of individuals that are in it for themselves instead of for us the taxpayer footing the exorbitant expenses being racked up?
~Source: Possibly from childhood games, where one child defines the rules and as the game progresses changes them midstream for their own personal agenda.
The following observation has been provided as a possible insight as to why these entitled fish in the trailer have become the way they are. Intially many years ago it was probably amusing(still is) to watch the fish suck up popcorn with their gaping mouths. As years pass as they always do, these carp were possibly trained and conditioned(similar to pavlovs dog) by the many tourists(including this writer) walking along the wharf of the day. Instead of a bell it is footsteps and vibrations.
Information regarding Nobel Laureate Ivan Pavlov(1849-1936) can be found at the following website: http://www.nobelprize.org/educational/medicine/pavlov/readmore.html
As time progressed the DNA of the parents were passed onto the Roe. The offspring over generations possibly developed the taste for the public popcorn and because it was ingrained into their being, when the vibrations were felt or footsteps were heard they were to line up at the wharf in order to get their entitlement of public popcorn.
3: Roe or hard roe is the fully ripe internal egg masses in the ovaries, or the released external egg masses of fish and certain marine animals, such as shrimp, scallop and sea urchins. As a seafood, roe is used both as a cooked ingredient in many dishes and as a raw ingredient. The roe of marine animals, such as the roe of lumpsucker, hake and salmon, is an excellent source of omega-3 fatty acids
~source: wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roe
Will we ever return to the days of public officials being in office with the attitude of, it is about us and not themselves? Will public officials and representatives wake up one morning with the attitude of giving back instead of continual taking at the entitlement wharf or trough as the case may be? In the next election will there be a new trailer come out titled Rules of Entitlement(roe) II- ‘The Game Changer’ ?
Time will tell whether or not the next election will be a true game changer in the tax payers lives. In order for the rules to change then the players need to be changed as well. Also an attitude change in the public tourist to resist the urge to continually feed the entitlement conditioned fish in order to start them on a road to withdrawal and rehabilitation of the conditioning process that was started many years ago by well meaning tourists. If this game changing process is not initiated willingly than one day there will be no choice in the matter as the source of popcorn will one day dry up and there will be no more for the tourist to give and therefore nothing left for the entitlement addicted fish to take. What would the withdrawal symptoms be like upon the abrupt discontinuation of their entitlement addiction with no more public popcorn or tourist to provide their continual fix of cherished food?
A question in closing for readers to consider: In the legislature buildings of the day are there bells?