After 40 years in power, it’s time for regime change in Alberta. Once upon a time, the premier appeared to know that.

Change was her Obama-like mantra, chanted daily for the seven months of her leadership drive. “Together, we are going to change how things are done in Alberta,” Alison Redford promised.

That was before she won. She was going to rid the province of the Conservatives’ “old boys’ club.” That was before she needed any advice and learned who really ran the show.

“Today, Alberta voted for change,” she said on Oct. 1. For the past 10 weeks, a lot of water has run under that bridge.

Continuity with the old boys is most obvious in the recent entitlements the unchanged regime has imposed on us, the million-dollar-plus handshakes given to former premier Ed Stelmach and Speaker Ken Kowalski. Nor should we forget Gary Mar’s transition from one trough in Washington, D.C., to another in Hong Kong. This is how the entitled old boys take care of themselves. When confronted with similar porcine problems in April 1993, former premier Ralph Klein showed leadership, changed the terms of the gold-plated pension plan and won the next election against all expectations.

In contrast, Tory party president Bill Smith has refused to say how much money Redford is getting in her top-up payment. When Liberal MLA Hugh MacDonald asked about it in question period, Kowalski shut him down. In fact, we don’t really know what the leader’s expense reimbursement and benefit plan trust, a version of which began in Peter Lougheed’s time, is used for. Party-related work, we’re told. Does it include a new wardrobe? A haircut? A BMW? A trip to Maui? Nobody knows.

Redford initially indicated how change would be operationalized when she planned to cancel the fall sitting of the legislature. After considerable public outrage, she changed her mind. It was, however, a revealing display of her default position.

On health-care mismanagement, in July, Redford called for a judicial inquiry to uncover “the truth and put a stop to practices that go against my personal and political values.” Many people understood her to mean queue-jumping orchestrated by bureaucrats and politicians to get their friends and family to the head of the line. But she changed her mind and called on the Health Quality Council, which reports to the government, to look at the problem — just what her predecessor had planned.

Then she made a cosmetic change that further obscured an already muddy issue. A judge would head the Health Quality Council investigation of queue-jumping, but not until sometime next year, when they finish an investigation of doctor intimidation. Thus, the big scandal — if there is one — will not be exposed until after the spring election.

And then came Bill 26, the new impaired driving law. The Herald called management of the bill “ham-handed.” True enough, but why didn’t the Tories consult with anyone beforehand or reconsider the consequences afterward? As with her initial decision to cancel the legislative session, Bill 26 exposed another default position: whenever possible, reinforce the nanny state. Like a stern schoolmarm, Redford knows best. Perhaps this is the change she had in mind?

When Prime Minister Stephen Harper was able to change the regime in Ottawa, it was because the stench that accompanied the tradition of Liberal entitlement had become unbearable. This is Redford’s burden and the great opportunity for Danielle Smith and the Wildrose party.

When Redford appointed Kelly Charlebois, who was at the centre of the scandal surrounding Mar when Mar was Health minister, to be interim leader of the Alberta PC Association, that move reinforced continuity, not change. Worse, she retained Stephen Carter, who engineered her win, as chief of staff even though Carter’s company owes a large chunk of change to the University of Calgary, which is heavily dependent on government grants.

In other words, Carter is in a position where his interests may interfere with his official duties. Redford is a lawyer and clearly knows that conflict of interest does not require the commission of an impropriety. So why is this new old boy still there?

So here is my question: How do you like regime change in Alberta so far?