Thoughts on the Alnoor Kassam Campaign

It's easy to say "I won't vote for this candidate" - in fact I think most voters do that on an almost instinctive basis. It's a bit more difficult to articulate why you make such a decision.

Looking around at the various candidates for Mayor, we have two that seem to be plausible contenders - Dave Bronconnier and Alnoor Kassam.

Bronconnier (aka "Bronco") is a polarizing man - you either love him or you hate him. (I'm a little odd about it - I'm rather indifferent to the man). He's either the mayor that stood up to Edmonton and won the confrontation, or he's the weaselly guy with a one track mind about roads.

Before this election, I had only heard of Alnoor Kassam a handful of times, and besides a rather greedy decision to raise rents on an apartment building he owns by a multiple of 4, he's been a cipher to me.

But something about the man makes me feel uneasy. I can't put a finger on it - he presents well in public, and is generally a good speaker. So, why don't I trust him?

It's a combination of factors when it comes down to it.

First, although Alnoor claims that he was "cleared" of wrongdoing by Canadian immigration with respect to his involvement in the collapse of Kenya's Trade Bank, there's a world of difference between the kind of investigation that immigration is going to do and what charges someone may face in another country. Yes, I realize that Kenya's legal system is somewhat checkered, but the fact remains that Alnoor Kassam faces legal sanction should he ever choose to return to Kenya.

There's a much longer history to Kassam, who fled Kenya in 1993 with the law at his heels for his involvement in the country's greatest banking scandal.

He was a principal of Trade Bank, as well as Diner's Club. A huge inquiry over government subsidy of exports focused on the fate of the bank.

Kenyan officials have said he's welcome to return, as long as he coughs up $23 million Cdn he's alleged to have taken with him.

Kassam insists he didn't take a penny, noting that a Canadian immigration tribunal ruled in his favour.

Whether bribery and corruption are "part of the political culture" in Kenya is quite irrelevant to me as a Canadian voter. The impression I have is that Kassam "skipped town one step ahead of the law" - a worrisome and disturbing shadow cast over someone who wishes to lead a city the size and complexity of Calgary.

The second point is one of wondering about his motives. He is allegedly matching Bronconnier dollar for dollar on campaign spending - a number rumored to be in the vicinity of a million dollars or so. Considering the $160,000 annual salary that Calgary's mayor receives in remuneration, there's a few prickly questions that we have ask. While Bronconnier has had the last three years to fund raise for this campaign, Kassam can't - and doesn't - make the same claim - instead he is taking the money out of his own pocket. Fair enough, but what businessman spends $1,000,000 to recoup $480,000 over the course of the next 3 years? Even with my limited experience with high finance, that seems like a pretty odd investment. So, what is he seeking to gain? {especially in light of the unresolved questions surrounding the collapse of his ventures in Kenya, and some of the activities he freely admits to, one has to ask such a question}

The last point that makes me wonder about this candidate is the fact that he is seeking to lead this city after moving here relatively recently. His own bio shows that he has seldom stayed in any one place for very long - and has just moved to Calgary in the last four or five years. I hate to sound like a regionalist, but I have a hard time believing that he "gets Calgary" just yet. He may like the city, but does he really understand it and the complexities of it?

Like the guy who sold me my first house, Alnoor feels a little like he's out for his own interests - and is not above taking advantage of someone else to achieve his goals - whatever they may be.

Another "Government == Business" Candidate

In Calgary's civic election this year, we have another nitwit seeking the Mayor's chair that blithely equates business and government:

“A city is no different than a business: it has an annual operating budget of $2 billion, 12 thousand employees and 1 million customers.” His vision is as unique as his approach: let Calgarians determine priorities by sharing their concerns, streamline processes, eliminate waste, and focus on the issues that are important to “customers” – the people of Calgary.

This is flawed on a dozen different levels, but it ultimately comes back to one fundamental point: Government does not have the same objectives as Business.

Businesses exist to make money - period. In truth, most businesses are run by people who try their best to do so "well" - with some sense of moral and ethical balance - but ultimately no business exists without making money from its customers. Although challenging, the single minded goal of making money is quite different from the role government must play.

Governments on the other hand are held to account for a much more complex set of obligations than any business. Not only must government (even civic) balance its books between revenues and expenditures, but it carries the burden of paying for a whole host of services that we depend upon - from police and fire to water and sewage treatment. Complicating the picture, the city also winds up having to deal with all of the problems that most of us don't know what to do with - the homeless, effects of poverty, insane growth and the stresses placed on infrastructure by that growth. Government is also obliged to balance the interests of citizens with the demands of business. (If one does not remember incidents such as The Love Canal in the states, or Lynnwood Ridge in Calgary, it is easy to lose track of the need for government to provide a regulatory environment for businesses as well to keep their activities balanced with the collective interests of the citizens...such as not having their homes built on toxic waste sites)

The "balance sheet" for government is complex and multi-faceted. The simplistic view that there is an equivalence with government demonstrates a lack of understanding of topics that cannot readily be understood in terms of finances, and people can seldom be understood in terms of money or numbers.