From this morning's Globe and Mail, in a story about how David Emerson hasn't had an MP Web page since he shuffled over to the Conservatives:
"We are updating it. I don't have a time frame, but hopefully soon. We realize the Internet is very popular."
-- Jennifer Chiu, spokesperson for Minister Emerson
I hear there's also some kind of horseless carriage that is all the rage too...
Friday, March 31, 2006
Press secretaries say the darndest things
Do the clothes make the man?
I don't like to focus on the trivial things, as I think doing so tends to distract from issues of substance. For example, I've found the discussion of Stephen Harper's weight silly. Besides, I'm the last person to be giving lectures on that subject.
I had to laugh though at that outfit Harper was wearing yesterday on his outing in the ruins with his new amigos, El Presidentes Bush and Fox. Don't get me wrong, I'm much more concerned about his misguided plans for daycare and taxes, to name but two issues, but seriously, dude, what-up with that top? Are you waiting for the GST cut to kick-in before you go clothes shopping? You're the Prime Minister now man (for the time being).
The journalist in me is trained to dislike Leah McLaren, but she had an interesting piece on the topic in today's Mop & Pail.
Stephen, what the heck are you wearing?
LEAH McLAREN
From Friday's Globe and Mail
Stephen darling, can we talk?
What I and everybody else back in
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersWednesday, March 29, 2006
Harper's hands in my pocket, part two
Get ready to pay more in income taxes, starting as soon as July 1. I really think this is an issue that is going to come back and bite Stephen Harper, the economist, in the ass come the next election. I wonder if the
I've blogged at length here and here about how, to pay for their much ballyhooed one per cent GST cut, the Conservatives will be revoking income tax cuts made by the Liberals that are worth far more to average Canadians that the GST cut would be. Some might call that a tax increase. I know I would. You might also call it robbing the poor to pay the rich, who will benefit far more from the GST cut, but now we're descending into cliché.
Anyway, a story in the Globe and Mail today (buried nice and deep, of course) echoes much of what I've been saying for some time. I hope Canadians start to pay attention, because they sure weren't during the election campaign, and now they're going to have to pay the price.
Here's a few excerpts:
The tax hike in July could be even bigger if the Tories go ahead with plans to scrap the income tax break for the entire 2006 calendar year, as they said during the election.
Canada Revenue Agency would have to clawback extra tax in the second half of 2006 to make up for what wasn't collected in the first six months.
Now, the Conservatives and their supporters will ignore the fact that consumption taxes (like the GST), while politically unpopular, are in fact a far more progressive (fair) way of collecting tax than income taxes. Cutting income taxes will encourage savings, not a bad idea in our high debt society. Or, people can spend their income tax savings. Their choice, and choice is what the Cons are supposedly all about. To get the savings from a GST cut you're forced to spend more, and not on essentials like rent and groceries, because they're already GST exempt. No, its consumer items like cars and plasma screen tvs you need to buy. And the more you spend, the more you save. I know, it sounds weird. Retailers love it though.
The Conservatives will also ignore the fact that the average Canadians they claim to represent, like those guys in the coffee shop in their TV ads, will benefit far more from the Liberal income tax cut, and will be getting hosed under the Conservative plan, which is a great deal for the biscotti
What they'll tell you is the Liberal tax cuts were never really official, because the legislation didn't make it through the HoC and Senate before they brought down the house to force an election. (As a parliamentary convention, tax cuts take effect before the enabling legislation is passed so people can't benefit unfairly during the period between announcement and assent).
We were nice enough to let you keep the savings for 2005, they'll say, but for 2006 it's back to the higher tax rate. But no no no, that's not a tax increase, they'll say. The rate was never really lower, not officially, so going back to the old rate isn't an increase, don't look at your pay stub, it's a mirage, and, and….this is where their faces start to turn (Conservative) blue.
Here's what Canadians know. Beginning this year, their take home pay increased because less income tax was being withheld. As soon as July 1, they'll notice their take home pay has gone down, because more tax is being deducted. Possibly a lot more, if the Cons decide to clawback as far as Jan. 1.
You know what they're going to see that as? If you said a tax hike, you can have an apple. Yes, a tax hike, courtesy Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservative government. And no one is going to be able to convince them otherwise. Go ahead and try, it will be fun. Call a press conference or something. Just remember to let the media know.
Pretzel logic by grade schoolers in the G&M
I think yesterday must have been take your children to work day at Canada's National Newspaper, and the editorial board decided to let the youngins write one of the editorials. That's the only way I can think of to explain the pretzel logic in the editorial I read today over breakfast (a fruit explosion muffin from Tim Horton's, delish).
Called "The Liberals' Warning" (access it here to avoid the subscriber firewall) the thesis of the piece is the Conservatives are in the saddle now, and even though it's a minority the Liberals had better just shut-up and take it like a man.
That's a stupid argument that makes little sense, ignores the fact that this is a minority, most Canadians voted for parties directly opposed to the Conservative platform, and the job of the opposition is, well, to oppose, but whatever. It's not a new argument, at least from the lips of Stephen Harper and Conservative bloggers that have drunk his kool aid.
No, what is silly is the logic the kids of the Globe and Mail's editorial writers use in their attempt to back-up their flimsy thesis. Their argument seems to be the minority Liberals fed the culture of entitlement by trying to push through their own agenda without a mandate in the last Parliament, and so were rightly thrashed at the polls. The Conservatives are in government now, and even though they only have a minority too, if the Liberals don't let them do whatever they want the Liberals will just be continuing to feed that culture of entitlement. It doesn't matter most Canadians don't support their policies; they eked out a minority so deal with it.
This is from the same people who scant months ago were writing editorials reminding the Liberals they were in minority, had to work with the opposition, find support on each bill, compromise, and so on. I guess compromise is only for Liberals though?
The fact is the Liberal minority government did work with the opposition parties, and the Conservatives will have to do the same. Harper does not have a mandate from the people to do much of what he's proposing, and he does need to work with the opposition, and compromise, if he's to get anything accomplished.
That's not obstructionism. It's called parliamentary democracy. Perhaps, children of the G&M's editorial writers, that will be covered in next week's social studies class.
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
A secret cabal of MPs runs Canada’s government
A secret cabal of MPs runs Canada’s government
The first rule of “cabinet” is don’t talk about “cabinet”: insider
The first rule of “cabinet” is don’t talk about “cabinet”: insider
By Anita Bath
The Globe Times Post
While 308 people might be elected to the House of Commons, not all Members of Parliament are created equal.
A three-month long investigation by The Globe Times Post has learned a secret organization made-up of select Members of Parliament exists in Ottawa, exerting enormous influence over the activities of the Federal government, and in effect running the country.
Calling itself “The Cabinet” this group meets regularly to plot the business of the nation in line with Conservative Party of Canada principles and ideals. These location and timing of these meetings, and particularly what is discussed at them, is never, ever made public. In fact, even confirming one’s membership in this secret society would be enough to be banished from it, said one insider who spoke on condition of anonymity.
“The first rule about The Cabinet is don’t talk about The Cabinet,” said the source.
The Cabinet meets regularly at an undisclosed location in Ottawa, believed to be a room on the third floor of Parliament Hill’s Centre Block, not far from the Prime Minister’s Office, called “The Cabinet Room.” Media have never been allowed to enter, nor have they tried as it has long been assumed this was a storage room for armoires, but it now appears that seemingly innocuous name may have deeper meaning.
“I did wonder though why once a week security locked us in our offices,” said one reporter. This newspaper has confirmed this weekly imprisoning of the press coincides with times The Cabinet was believed to be secretly meeting.
And membership in this secret cabal does have its privileges. When one MP was “summoned to the cabinet” he found that overnight his pay had increased substantially. There were also other perks, like the limousine and driver that now takes him everywhere he needs to go, a bigger office and staff, and even access to a secret fleet of private government aircraft.
In exchange, the price for membership in the cabinet is a slavish devotion to the Prime Minister and the party line; even if it means abandoning previously deeply help principles and ideals, all in the name of cabinet solidarity.
This may explain the bizarre about face on the issue of floor crossing by Saskatoon-Rosetown-Biggar MP Carol Skelton, who The Globe Times Post has learned may be a member of the secret cabinet organization. Skelton, who had previously been outspoken against Members of Parliament crossing the floor and changing parties, was bizarrely silent on the issue when former Liberal MP David Emerson joined the Conservative Party a few weeks after the election for no apparent reason.
“That was last year,” said Skelton at the time. “We talked about it and…it’s one of those matters that is debatable.”
Skelton was whisked away by an unknown, Blackberry toting functionary before she could elaborate, or explain who the “we” she was referring to was. But a source says such embarrassing about-faces are the price of cabinet membership.
“That front-row seat in the House and the limousine don’t come without a price,” says one insider. “Sure, being in a secret society sounds glamorous and cool, but its really not. It’s a lot of long hours secretly running the country and remolding it to Conservative ideals.”
The exact size of the cabinet cabal is unknown, but members are each assigned areas of government to take responsibility for, from national defence and the law to foreign affairs and propaganda. But even within this secret cabal, it seems there are cliques. One insider confirms those cabinet members responsible for one of the Prime Minister’s five “priority areas” have a special status, while the others are required to keep a very low profile and avoid talking to members of the press.
The Globe Times Post tried to speak to the Prime Minister’s Office about the alleged existence of this secret cabinet organization, but a spokesperson for the PMO declined to comment.
“Why are you making things up when we give you so many good news stories to write about, like how much the Prime Minister loves hockey and Tim Horton’s?” said Sandra Buckler, the PM’s communications director. “We told you, when we have something to say we’ll be available. Now go away.”
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
If she was a former Tory it'd be on the front page
These days it seems a Liberal just taking French lessons is enough for them to be considered a possible leadership contender.
Amusing piece in the Toronto Star's political blog today on the leadership non-aspirations of one Marie Bountrogianni, who I'm told is
"This is a joke, right?" she replied when asked if she's boning up for a leadership run. "No, I'm not ... The last time I took French was 30 years ago in Grade 13."
Bountrogianni said she simply feels compelled to become fluent in
I'm off to hang-out outside French as a second language classes at Ryerson and the U of T looking for more potential leadership candidates. Stay tuned.
Papa Bear Bush meeting with reporters in secret
I was going to write something on the whole brouhaha between the Harper administration and the media, but it has been covered quite thoroughly elsewhere. Paul Wells has a very thorough post on the topic I agree with, and Politics Watch has a transcript of the Press Gallery's meeting with Harper's lobbyist communications director for those interested in the nitty gritty.
Since Stephen does seem to usually take his que from Papa Bear though, I did want to pass on this item from Salon's War Room blog. It seems the media shy El Presediante Bush is meeting with some members of the press. But in private, and off completely off the record/secret. A foreshadowing, perhaps?
Bush has begun sitting down for informal chats with small groups of White House reporters invited to join him inside the White House residence. What does the president say away from the glare of the TV lights and the posturing of the press room? You don't know -- and neither do we -- because the reporters invited to the sessions have promised the White House that they won't say anything about them.
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
(more)
Don't mix your sci-fi references Paul!
OK, so I know I'm like a month and a half behind the times, but I finally got around to finishing Paul Wells' election opus in MacLean's today. An excellent piece of journalism, but I need to mention this one line, discussing the Liberal election apparatus:
"When it armed its photon torpedoes for an assault on the Conservative death star, it discovered its most potent weapons were pointed backward."
Nice analogy Paul, but photon torpedoes are Star Trek, and the death star is Star Wars!
Lets stick with Star Wars because I do like the Conservatives as the empire, because that casts Stephen Harper as Darth Vader. It also makes the Liberals the rebel alliance, and I guess it means we're currently casting for the Luke Skywalker/Princess Leia role. (You can pause here to picture Ms. Stronach with the Leia hairdo. Or Dr. Ignatieff if you prefer, your call.)
So, now I just need to know which Liberal leadership candidate was sired by Darth Harper before he went to the dark side/joined the National Citizens Coalition and I'll know which candidate I should support/will bring balance to the force.
Live long and prosper!
Monday, March 27, 2006
The softwood dispute is only getting worse
All has been quiet on the softwood front for some time now, at least in
I must have missed this story in the national media but apparently in early March, at the request of the "Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports" (an oxymoron if there ever was one, they're the U.S. lumber lobby responsible for this dispute) the Bush Administration extended their anti-dumping and countervailing duties to items that had previously not been covered.
This has always been about protectionism and not "fair lumber imports" and that is readily apparent with how this new measure by the
These guys buy their wood from independent lots that aren't impacted by stumpage fees, as well as beetle-kill sales and windfall reclamation. Yet after this latest decision, they're now hit by the duty.
To add insult to injury, the duty is bizarrely calculated on the cost of the finished product and not the wood they use (which shouldn't be covered anyway). Their business is value-add, as the article says of the $10 to $12 final cost of their product, only $2 to $3 is the wood. The duty makes his product 25 per cent more expensive.
So, two months into this Conservative government things are only getting worse on this softwood front. I know this isn't one of the vaunted five priorities, but could someone in the Harper cabinet, or perhaps Mr. Harper himself, let the people of coastal B.C. know what they're doing about this? Mr. Emerson? Anyone?
Before the recent election the riding was represented by a Conservative MP, and were he still around and were the Liberals still in government, I know exactly what he'd say about this story. Probably pretty close to what his NDP replacement said:
Local NDP MP Catherine Bell said it is unfair — and their responsibility in Parliament will be pushing the Conservative government to do something about it.
“This issue needs to be settled; it’s hurting
She said this expansion of tariffs is just proof that as long as the federal government stands by on the issue Canadians will continue to be taken advantage of.
So, the ball is in your court Mr. Harper. This latest provocation wasn't a Senate decision; it was made by the administration of your friend. Mr. Bush. While in opposition you and your colleagues constantly derided Liberal efforts on this file, and pledged you'd do better. Just be nice to them and it will all be better.
Well, it's not getting better, it's getting worse. And we're waiting.
Sunday, March 26, 2006
More ammo against the Con "tax plan"
I’ve already blogged at length on the inequities of the Conservative plan to replace the pre-election Liberal income tax cuts with a one (and, if you reelect them, two) per cent cut in the Goods and Services Tax, so I won’t rehash the case at length again.
Except there’s now more corroboration to show how the Cons are out to lunch on this one. A recent CBC Reality Check lays out the case nicely, reporting on a study comparing the plan the Liberals proposed to the one the Conservatives, supported by a minority of voters who probably didn’t look past the electronics store photo-op anyway, plan to impose.
Who will be the biggest beneficiaries of the one per cent GST cut? If you’re thinking it’s you, Joe and Jane Canuck that stop at Timmy’s for a double double on the way to dropping Jenny at ringette practice, think again, unless you own the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce. Because according to the study, some of the main beneficiaries will be (all over five years):
Banks and Financial Institutions: $2.6 billion
Doctors, dentists, and other health professionals: $650 million
Landlords: $970 million
It should also be noted that hospitals, universities and colleges will also benefit to the tune of $1.3 billion, and I’m cool with that. I don’t think the banks need the help though. Think they’ll lower service fees with the savings? Yeah, neither do I. There are ways of helping hospitals, universities and colleges without throwing gobs cash at the uber rich that the Cons might want to look into.
Here’s another fun statistic from the study. By lowering the lowest marginal interest rate by one per cent and increasing the basic personal exemption, actions the Conservatives will undo (or not do again, depending on how you want to look at it) the previous Liberal government saved most taxpayers $320 a year.
Now, the report says, to save $320/year via the Conservative GST cut, you’d have to spend $32,000 A YEAR on goods and services, and that doesn’t include rent or mortgage payments, groceries, prescriptions, tuition, child care, loan payments and investments, all of which you don’t pay GST on.
So, please, Mr. Harper and Mr. Flaherty, please tell me again how this GST cut is a better deal for the average Canadians you claim to represent?
I can’t wait for the first question period.
Saturday, March 25, 2006
Scarborough Centre anyone
I know this is a long-shot, but is there anyone out there reading this with the Federal Liberal riding association in Scarborough-Centre?
I believe I am a member, I submitted my membership form to the LPC(O) in December and I know they cashed my cheque, but I haven’t received any communications from the party or from the riding association. I know there’s an LPC(O) convention coming-up in May that I wouldn’t mind attending, but I haven’t received or seen any notice or communications about a delegate selection meeting for my riding.
Anyone out there from Scarborough-Centre, or have a contact for the riding association? Please send me an e-mail.
Thanks!
Friday, March 24, 2006
I guess the media pundits didn’t feel the love
Watched the weekly press gallery pundits segment on Don Newman’s Politics broadcast tonight, and the media verdict on the King Ed event last night seems to be pretty negative. And it’s really quite silly, even annoying. No, just silly.
Susan Delacourt in particular is making much of the fact that few of the Martini hard core board members were there (with the exception, at least, of John Duffy), and so therefore nothing was accomplished toward unification, as this was just a gathering of Chretien Liberals in exile pushing their way back in.
It was the same spin on Mike Duffy’s media panel with Jane Taber and Lawrence Martin on his show tonight. It was all Chretienites, and Oh Board, Oh Board, where for art thou board? How can you heal with only one side, and so on.
I’m sorry, but that’s a load of crap. First off, I don’t know how many hard core Martinis were actually there, as I left my sheet of The Board mug shots at home. But, as much as I’d like to see Warren Kinsella and David Herle exchange hugs and kisses, it’s not really necessary.
It’s not necessary for the backroom boys to kiss and make up on tv for the party to heal. It would help, and I think that is hapenning, but it's importance is being overblown. The healing really needs to happen at the grassroots. And I think it is happening at the grassroots. And if the grassroots heal underneath the mucky mucks, the mucky mucks will either mend fences along with the party or be rendered irrelevant and powerless. After all, whatever power they have comes from the grassroots.
Look, no one expects everything to be magically fixed with one night of wine and cheese. But I think an important step was taken last night, and the media spin was out to lunch.
P.S. Duffy says Belinda Stronach wasn’t in Vancouver last night (and not at the King Ed) as previously reported, but was taking in a Canadiens/Maple Leafs hockey game at the Bell Centre instead. What-up with that? In case you're wondering, Montreal won 5-1.
No Senate elections in Saskatchewan
Senate reform is one of my pet issues, and I found myself agreeing with Saskatchewan Premier Lorne Calvert today as he discussed the issue on Don Newman’s Politics broadcast this evening.
Calvert met with Stephen Harper yesterday, and Senate reform was one of the issues they discussed. Harper is looking for provinces to get onboard with Senate elections, but Calvert isn’t buying. He thinks, as I’ve blogged in the past, that having Senate elections without fundamental and substantial Senate reform just doesn't make sense.
Here's a transcript:
Don: Are you going to hold elections for Senate vacancies in your province?
Lorne: Well, we talked about that yesterday, the Prime Minister and I, and I again outlined my position. Some Canadians have talked about building an equal, an effective, AND an elected Senate. My position is we would not look at election until we got the other two straight. Why would we elect to the body that currently exists if we’ve not built a body that demonstrates equality and demonstrates effectiveness. So let’s work on the first two Es, and then we can consider how we choose Canadians.
Don: And I guess the Prime Minister has a different view? So you’re not on the same page there?
Lorne: On this we will not be on the same page.
I haven't been keeping track but I don't see many provinces hopping aboard this train.
Thursday, March 23, 2006
Almost live blogging from the Liberal love-in @ The King Ed
Greetings from the lobby of the King Edward Hotel in downtown Toronto, host to the Liberal love-in, aka The King Edward Accord. The speeches are over and only the shmoozing remains.
17:45: I arrive and after securing my media accreditation (a nifty Canada flag pin) I mill about the lobby where people are mingling and networking as a choir sings in the background. It's all very ladee-da. A quick look around the room and I recognize Don Boudria, Denis Mills (the night's organizer), Joe Fontana, and Jean Augistine.
17:50: They're scrumming Bob Rae, good sized crowd around him, but no one seems to want to talk to Joe Fontana. Poor fellow.
17:55: Julie Van Dusen from the CBC and a few fellow scribes are scrumming Joe Volpe, as his handlers look on. There's no division here, says Joe, and some pap about nation building. He neatly sidesteps the need to say anything nice about Sheila Copps, tonight is for all the Liberal women says Joe (although it's Sheila's picture on an easel by the stage), but he does mention he worked on Sheila's 1982 campaign for Ontario Liberal leader. What does he make of the fact there's no Paul Martin here? Joe says "Nothing."
18:10: The woman of the hour, Ms. Copps herself, arrives to strong applause through the lobby and chants of Sheila, Sheila! Much hugs and kisses as she makes her way slowly through the lobby, but no media scrum. She greats everyone like they're old friends, and most of them probably are.
18:21: Who is that getting a hug from Sheila, he looks vaguely familiar. Is it...yes, it's a muctachless David Orchard! Very interesting. I resist the urge to ask him if he's going to seek the Liberal leadership.
18:23: We scrum with Scott Brison. A few quotes:
"Politics is a tough business and it's particularly tough for women, frankly. (Sheila) deserves credit, she deserves respect."
If tonight is about healing, Van Dusen wants to know how Copps was treated badly, but Scotty isn't biting.
"There is a recognition in the party we need to be unified. I think that's something you'll find with all people involved in this leadership race. There is a real desire to come together as Liberals and have a civil leadership race focused on a debate of ideas and vision for the country, and not on divisivness and personalities."
So are you running then Scott?
"I think we're going to make a decision in the next while. We're certaintly weighing our options. This is not grade nine class president we're talking about. There are a number of factors, but the fact is we've had some very successful exploratory work...building a network accross Canada."
18:24: Orchard is schmoozing with Stephane Dion now, the guy is a networking machine.
18:30: We scrum with Ken Dryden, who was the most popular of the potential leadership candidates with the media tonight, along with Bob Rae. Ken said some really good stuff about party unity and what not, and struck me as the most real and unpolitical of the candidates there. A few of Ken's quotes:
"There clearly have been fights in the past, and I think you fight when you either are small and you have no chance of winning, or you fight when you're so strong that you have in some way, some how, the luxury of fighting. And parties were created to win. The Liberal Party knows how to win. It's that kind of recognition, that kind of understanding...we're not the government now, and if we're going to form the government then we need everybody."
So were the Liberals to big or too small, asks Van Dusen. Ken points out she darn well knows which, but she presists.
"Clearly this was a party of the latter. This was a party that had been very successful and has been able to win even at times when there have been divisions."
As a leadership candidate could you bring the party together?
"Whatever healing needs to be done is done by the parties involved, the people involved, because it comes out of a desire to (heal), and a desire to win."
No Chretien or Martin here, whadya think?
"I don't think anything of it. I'm sure they can speak for themselves."
18:35: Denis Codere is also popular with the media, getting the full scrum treatment.
"I think there's a lot of people that are happy, and shaking hands. Just for that moment, to be here, to send out the message there's only one flag, the Liberal flag, I think that's important. I think we still had that sense of revenge from some areas, and now that's all over with the last election. The leadership campaign will be a great moment to bring everyone together."
18:38: I spot star Liberal blogger Jason Chernaik talking with Dion and his crew, they profess to be regular readers of Chernaik on Politics. I chat for a few minutes with Jason, but I promised it would be off the record.
18:42: Another scrum, this time with Joe Fontana. They want to talk to him after all. And hey, there's Marene Jennings. I join Joe mid scrum, as he comments on the plethora of potential candidates.
"Why not? They (all) should be looking at it. They've got a lot to offer. I hope the mission of all the potential candidates is how do you build a bigger, broader party, more inclusive, as we prepare for the next election."
18:43: Scrumming with Bob Rae, who says he's thinking about a run for the leadership. He doesn't touch questions about Liberal disunity with a 10-foot pole. So, you running Bob?
"Obviously it's something I'm considering, and I've said that. I'm reflecting on it. Im not making any decisions overnight, but I really wanted to be here for Sheila. This is her night. It's not about be, it's about her."
18:44: (All times appx. BTW) I stick my recorder in as City TV interviews Warren Kinsella. The healing has begun. On his blog, Warren has some excellent comments on Liberal renewal and all that good stuff, comments I very much agree with. As I do with his comments tonight:
"Generally, if people think the party is a loser, and not worth their time, then there wouldn't have been a lot of people coming out. (High turnout tonight is a good sign). The challenge is a lot of people don't know where to go."
Is the party ready for healing?
"I think so, yeah. A civil war is like all wars, at the end of them you put an end to it. It's bloddy, divisive and difficult, and I'm one of the people that may have helped play a role in that, I was one of the warriors. But you get tired of it. The result at the end of a 10-year civil war has been a Conservative government. (So it's time to heal)."
Would you say something nice about Paul Martin.
"He was a formidable opponent. That's nice. I feel better already."
18:46: Scrumming with Stephane Dion. Are you running Stephane?"I haven't decided yet but it's more likely than the opposite."
What do you need to know before deciding?
"I need to make my mind up completly because we're talking about the most successful party in all the democratic world. (The winner could) become Prime Minister of a very great country, but one that's very complex to govern, so it's a decision you (need to take your time before making."
I'm not one to judge people's language skills, but then again I'm also not a potential leadership candidate. I do think Stephane needs to work on his English a bit though.
18:48: Much gasps of surprise as Aline Chretien enters the lobby. It's fantastic to see her here. She doesn't scrum but is followed closely by the cameras as she greats old friends. I have to tell one cameraman who she is, which was kind of sad. As soon as he hears "Jean Chretien's wife" he's off like a flash, camera up and ready. 18:55: Making my way into the room, and hey there's Michael Ignatieff (I think) and John Turner.
I just talked to one of the organizers (as I write this), he estimates a crowd of 450 to 500. He says they were expecting 400, so they're quite pleased with the success. Back to blog time now, the ballroom is packed to the gills, open bar and hors doeuvers. It's hot and sweaty. First rule of political organization: book a room too small for the crowd you expect so the crowd looks bigger. Dennis Mills probably wrote the book on that, and it was mission accomplished tonight.
I head toward the back of the room and Denis Codere thrusts his hand out at me. The guy is really pressing the flesh, if he's shaking the hands of media types he must be serious. I give him a firm handshake and a "how ya doin" and carry on.
Paul Zed reads a list of Liberal women here tonight, and while he mentions Belinda Stronach it occures to me I haven't seen her here tonight, and Ms. Stronach is hard to miss. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think she's here. At an event honouring Liberal women. And her a potential leadership candidate, and the most high profile current woman Liberal caucus member. From a riding in suburban Toronto. If she indeed wasn't here, I hope she had a good exuse.
19:00: Former Prime Minister John Turner takes the stage. God bless him, but the man really looks his age. He's here tonight for one reason he says: Sheila. People are talking over JT, it's really quite disgusting. He's wasn't my favourite PM, but have some frickin respect people.
19:02: John McCallum walks in, he smiles and laughs and waves his arms all animated like. I didn't know he could do that!
19:03: Turner is still speaking, and making some nice points about party unity. It's time for a new generation of Liberals, we need a new generation of Sheilas to rebuild the party, and so on. One point that had me nodding my head, paraphrasing here "We need new policy before we need new leadership candidates." Hear hear John!
19:05. Aline takes the stage to warm applause and cheers, she looks great. She speaks warmly of Sheila..."Jean thinks she was one of his best ministers"...and brings greetings from her husband, who is in China at the moment.
19:10: The woman of the hour takes the stage to strong applause and cheers, but not quite the thunderious, sustained ovation I would have expected. Her opening line that tonight she like to announce her "intention to....not seek the leadership of the Liberal Party" gets a good laugh though. I'll admit, I had my heart in my throat for a second. :)She makes a comparison to the Liberal Party of 1984, a time when the pundits counted the party as dead, down and out, and a determined group of people brought the party back from the ashes, comparing it to the situation of the Liberal Party of today. I like the comparison. We need a new, young group of rat packers.
19:12: She "feels the love."
19:13: It's a very heartfelt speech from Sheila. I won't rehash every point she made as I'll assume many people were watching on CPAC, but you could tell many times she almost lost it as her voice started to crack.
19:20: I spot Peter C. Newman, with the trademark old man hat of course. Where is he at? The bar, naturally, god bless him. I just hope no one here serves him with lawsuit papers tonight.
19:28: Sheila talks for a loing while about national unity. I agree with her points, but I'm not aware of a current crisis on that front. Still, as a commenter noted this is an important issue, and a Liberal issue. Sheila has been a pasionate defender of Canada throughout her career, so it's only natural, and appropriate, she'd mention it.
19:31: After 20 minutes or so she leaves the stage. I got the impression she really missed this part of politics, the being on stage with a crowd listening to you, hanging on your every word. It must be like a drug.
Back to real time for a minute, just met Chris McLeod, one of the organizers, and the fellow that extended the invite to bloggers to attend tonight. Nice guy, and a nice idea to invite the bloggers. Well done.
19:34: Jean Augustine takes the stage to end the night, and with respect to Ms. Augistine it's hot and stuffy in this room and I need to get some air. I repair to the media room to figure out the WiFi connection. And I run in to fellow blogger Shoshana. It was nice to meet her, we talked a bit about the event. I won't spoil her blog post on the event though, which I look forward to reading.
Some final thoughts
This event was a good idea and I'm glad for the strong turnout. I hope it goes some way toward healing the rifts in our party. Such a thing won't happen overnight, but a start was made here tonight, and I hope that healing process continues here, and accross the country.
Since we're in a leadership race it's only natural that such talk should domiante the event (outside the formal speeches). While that's understandable, it's also sad. It's why I advocated for a later convention. The healing and renewal could better be accomplished outside the heated environment of a leadership race.
It was clear many people were here to schmooze, see and been seen, and not for party unity. The number of people talking, to each other and even on cell phones, during the program was sickening. Turner could barely be heard over the din, and while it quieted down a bit for Sheila, people were still jabbering and not paying attention. I wasn't impressed with that.
The media made much of the absence of Paul Martin and Jean Chretien. I think it was fine. Jean apperantly was in China, and Martin I'm told was in California. I think that's fine. If they'd been here they'd have been lightening rods, it all would have been about them. And tonight wasn't about them. It wasn't about the past. It's about the future.
And after tonight, I feel a little better about the Liberal Party's future. We've got a lot of work to do, but we're on our way.
UPDATE
For accounts of the evening from other Libloggers, visit Ted, aka Cerberus, James Curran, the "What do I know Grit", Cherniak on Politics, Shoshana and Trickle Down Truth. Let me know if I missed anyone and I'll add a link.
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Marrisen hearts Dion, and other leadership musings
I read the news last week that Mark Marrisen has signed-on as Stephane Dion's potential national campaign manager (if he runs, of course) while I was away and I didn't want to let it go without comment.
While I haven’t endorsed anyone yet, I've been hoping for some time he would enter the race and along with Ken Dryden he's the only candidate in the current field I could see myself supporting.
First, I guess this ends any possibility of a Christy Clark campaign (
But anyway, I'm of mixed feelings about the news.
On the one hand, this signals Dion is a fairly serious contender, and will at least have some West coast support. Mark ran Paul Martin's BC operation with a gloved fist of iron, and say what you will about his tactics (I and many have) but one thing he does know how to do is win delegate selection meetings (and create paper campus clubs, but that's another story).
So the fact Marrisen is onboard lends some weight to Dion's potential campaign, although I wouldn't put Mark in the same category as some of the people lining up behind Michael Ignatieff, Bob Rae and some of the others. Can Mark win on a level and unrigged playing field though? Should be interesting.
On the downside, Marrisen represents a lot of what is wrong with the Liberal Party, fairly or unfairly. As Martin's BC Leiutenant and two-time provincial campaign co-chair, that's just the way it is. Young Liberal campus club shenanigans have been in the news of late, that all happened under Mark's watch (and likely direction) during the last leadership campaign. The with us or against us mentality he brought, typified by former Chretien Minister Herb Daliwhal's ouster from his own riding association, has made him a lot of enemies in the province.
In short, like much of the Martin team his style proved very effective for winning delegate selection meetings but was radioactive for party unity. Electoral success in B.C., while impressive, has also been confined to urban areas, and came at a price.
The positive thing though is that the Martinis seem to have spread throughout the leadership field, I haven't seen a heavy concentration with any one candidate. That's a good thing, and it's why I won't loose too much sleep over Marrisen's running Dion's campaign. As long as Dion keeps him honest (no more shenanigans), power to him.
Whomever winds up as leader I hope they take a few lessons from the past few years and don't repeat the same mistakes.
- The people that got you the leadership aren't necesarily the same people that can win you the election, and/or run your office/the country.
- The party is bigger than the leader. It's the Liberal team, not the personality cult team. It doesn't matter who supported who for the leadership, we need to all work together, and not just say so on television
This convention date means an earlier membership sales cutoff, and less time for the policy debate and soul searching this party needs. I hope, at least, that the party organizes a series of debates accross the country so something resembling that debate can take place.
*That said, the opposition parties shouldn't back down on issues like daycare. Harper's party is clearly in the minority there, and if he doesn't want to negoiate then let him explain to the Canadian public why we're at the polls again, because it'd be his fault. I'd enjoy that campaign.
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
This is getting a little crazy
I'm sorry, and with all due respect to Martin Cauchon, but on what planet in this vast and mysterious universe would he have been considered a "star candidate"? Please tell me, I'd like to go there for my next vacation.
From the London Free Press, buried in an article about their local Liberal MP Joe Fontana's leadership ambitions (speaking of being out there, with due respect to my friend K):
Meanwhile, one of Fontana's cabinet colleagues, former justice minister Martin Cauchon, has become the fifth star candidate to decide against running.
(Full article here)
Wednesday, March 22, 2006
B.C. Ferries welcomes you aboard
Reports are still sketchy but it appears all 102 passengers and crew are safe and accounted for, and the fact there doesn't appear to have been any fatalities is a minor miracle. While there are certainly no ice bergs up there, those aren't the warmest waters this time of year. Reports said the seas were choppy with winds gusting to 75 km.
Imagine being awoken at 2:00 am to be told your ferry is sinking. But it appears the ship sunk slowly, allowing everyone time to evacuate. No word yet on the cause, other than that the ship appears to have run aground. The CBC reported with the usual ship in for its annual refit a larger vessel was plying the route, which may be responsible for its running aground.
While living in Courtenay on Vancouver Island I regularly took the ferry between
We're a long ways from knowing what happened here but I really hope this accident doesn't hurt the route's popularity with tourists, as the route is a significant economic boom during the summer for Prince Rupert, and more so for the smaller community of Port Hardy, on Vancouver Island. A friend of mine owns a hotel in Port Hardy and she said she's always full in the summer the days the ferry comes and goes.
What we can say for now is good work to the B.C. ferries crew, Coast Guard and military personnel that responded to successfully rescue the passengers, and especially to the 200 people of the small village of Hartley Bay that heard the SOS of the ship and took to the waters in the middle of the night with their fishing trawlers and other boats to help rescue the passengers, and have taken them into their community centre.
Here's a bit from the CP story:
Shelby Robinson, 13, said the entire
"I stayed here to get ready for them when they came in, get blankets ready and everything," she said.
Robinson confirmed fishermen from the isolated village rushed out to help evacuate the sinking ferry.
"Most of the guys went out and got their boats running right away and they took people in by groups," she said.
It always warms the heart to hear stories like that.
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersTuesday, March 21, 2006
Ken Dryden hits the left coast
Looks like Ken Dryden is the latest of the potential Liberal leadership candidates to be making a stop on the left coast. He’s not without handicaps but I like Ken, he’s a candidate I could see myself supporting and I hope he gets in the race.
Here's the invite:
You are cordially invited to a reception with
Hon. Ken Dryden
Tuesday, March 28, 2006
12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m.
Vancouver Island Ballroom
Grand Pacific Hotel
436 Belleville Street, Victoria
Food and Refreshments will be provided
Please join us as we discuss the future of the Liberal Party of Canada and the LPC in B.C.
This reception is amongst a series of similar gatherings in British Columbia featuring prominent Liberals from across Canada.
We think it is important to have an open dialogue about the future of our Party and who should lead it. This is neither intended nor should be interpreted as an endorsement or support of any particular candidate for the upcoming leadership race in the Liberal Party of Canada but rather a chance to meet and help form the debate to ensure BC issues are front and centre.
Please feel free to share with invitation with other interested Liberals.
Random musings on airline travel
- If they recommend you check-in two hours before departure for U.S/International flights, couldn't THEY be there, say, at least two hours before departure? I had a 6:20 am flight from
- Unless I wear steal-toed boots, why do I need to take my shoes off when going through security? And my belt? I'm not from
- I had the pleasure of sitting in United's Economy Plus section for part of my journey. I didn't really notice the difference until I was back in regular economy for my next leg. The extra legroom is really noticeable. I didn't buy the ticket, but assuming it doesn't cost too much more it really is worth it.
- United also has a cool feature on their audio system that lets you listen-in on radio communications between the cockpit and air traffic controllers. As an airplane junkie and son of a former air traffic controller I find it pretty cool. It also game me a preview of some nasty weather on the way to Chicago that built into tornadoes later in the day, cancelled most flights after ours, and gave us a pretty bumpy ride.
- In today's nickel and dime world of airline travel, isn't it nice when an airline gives you the full can of pop, without asking? Air
- What's the deal with airport loudspeakers? On my way back, at the gate in
- Finally, why don't more airports offer free WiFi? In fact, I'm only aware of one that does:
Monday, March 20, 2006
Steeltown British Columbia
Let me say for starters that I applaud the NDP for posting these job openings on their Web site, it's an excellent thing to do, and other parties would be well advised to follow suit.
While skimming through the ad (don't think I'll apply, my Liberalness could be a handicap) this line caught my eye. Under qualifications is this bullet:
- Knowledge of the New Democratic Party, the labour movement, government departments, community organizations, knowledge about Hamilton and riding priorities, an asset.
For those of you who are geographically challenged,
I guess I won't apply for sure now. Even if they looked past my Liberalness, while I'm intimately familiar with riding issues that riding is Vancouver Island North, not
B for Back in the country
I am home from
I'd very much recommend it. It was a little unnecessarily violent/bloody at times but it had a very powerful political message about the politics of fear and what happens when the many devolve their freedoms to the few in exchange for promises of security and safety.
I won't make any references to today's political situation as I think they're easy enough to make, I'll just say the film raises some very important questions and issues worthy of further thought.
Sunday, March 12, 2006
On the road again
Blogging will be sporadic again over the next week. Early Monday morning I’m off to San Diego for the week to cover Cisco’s partner summit, and hoping for warmer weather than my last trip to the US.
Also hoping that the spring break traffic will have cleared from Pearson when I arrive bleary-eyed at the airport Monday at the ungodly hour of 4:30 am for my 6:30 am flight to San Diego via lovely Chicago. I come back Friday; hopefully the kids will wait until the weekend to return from their spring break debauchery.
Much time will be spent learning about the finer points of Cisco’s sales strategy, which much talk no doubt of vertical integration, solutions, and other fun stuff, but there is an excursion to the famed San Diego Zoo on the schedule, and I plan to break away for a bit to check out the aircraft carrier USS Midway, which is now a floating museum in the San Diego Harbour. Looks pretty cool.
The one-day Emerson story, day 33
I missed this story yesterday, but it seems another log has been thrown on the David Emerson fire, not to mention the Ethics Commissioner fire. A complaint has been filed with Bernard Shapiro alleging Emerson is an a conflict of interest on the softwood file because of his pension stake in forest giant Canfor.
The Vancouver Sun reported yesterday that Liberal MP and trade critic Dominic LeBlanc filed a complaint on the issue with Shapiro on Friday. You may recall solving softwood was one of the reasons Emerson gave for crossing the floor, as well as the 2010 Games.
If this issue sounds a little familiar, it should. As I blogged here, Emerson already recused himself from the softwood file, back when he was the Liberal Industry minister. As the former CEO of Canfor, Emerson still has a financial link to the company through his pension plan. Accordingly, he signed a public decleration of recusal in November 2004 with the ethics commissioner forbidding him from being involved in matters that directly involve Canfor. As I wrote last month, Canfor is specifically named by the U.S.'s anti-dumping case at the heart of the dispute. So yeah, the softwood dispute involves Canfor.
To quote a few lines from LeBlanc’s letter:
"He (Emerson) is directly involved in negotiations not only related to the possible agreement with the United States but also the refund of deposits held by the U.S. Treasury and paid by Canadian softwood producers," LeBlanc wrote.
"Canfor Corporation would be one of the largest depositors of money subject to this potential refund."
This potential for conflict Emerson saw in November 2004 seemed to go out the window however when Emerson crossed the floor to the warm, comfy, welcoming embrace of Stephen Harper’s cabinet. Should Shapiro decide to investigate I’d have to think the first question he’d ask Emerson would have to be “If you felt you were in a conflict then, why aren’t you in a conflict now?”
It would be useful to put this same question to Harper, but I’m sure he’ll be just as loathe to cooperate as always. Maybe they should hire a second ethics commissioner, because he’s going to be pretty busy will all this work. And I'm sure there's more to come.
On a side note, reading this article I see I went to university with Emerson’s new press secretary. Poor kid, I wish her luck.
Complaint raises Emerson 'conflict'
The minister still has a stake in forestry giant Canfor, Liberal says
Peter O’Neil
Vancouver Sun
Saturday, March 11, 2006
OTTAWA -- Trade Minister David Emerson is in an apparent conflict as Canada's lead negotiator in the Canada-U.S. trade dispute because he still has a financial stake in the forestry giant Canfor Corp., according to a complaint sent Friday to Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro.
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Friday, March 10, 2006
Key health questions
I've been hard on the Ontario government the last few days over tuition and subway expansion, so it's worth mentioning Health Minister George Smitherman had a bang-on letter in the Globe and Mail this morning.
It was responding to Ralph Klien's proposed health care reform/privatization in Alberta. It wasn't until I got to the end that I realized it was written by the Ontario Health Minister ('s communications flunky), and I was pleasantly surprised.
I can't find the letter online, so here's a few excerpts:
Alberta now proposes to blow a gaping hole in our belief structure, and it does so despite its own very real successes at reform within the public health care system.
It also does so with no real evidence that simply slapping a private label on health care will make it better, and in the face of compelling evidence that it will not.
It's George's last point that really made me nod my head, as it’s a point I've made myself many times when debating health care privatization with its supporters, and one I've yet to hear a good counterpoint to:
Here is the main question: If you don't have the cash to pay your way to the front of the line – and let's be honest here, very few of us do – how will your access to health care be enhanced if already scarce health-care professionals are being tempted to move over to a private system?
That's a very good question. Another point is that it's the best and brightest that will be lured to the private sector to care for the rich, leaving the unwashed masses with the rest. Let them eat cake, I suppose.
I don't pretend to have all the answers on this. Our health care system is in need of reform. But I think we do a lot more right than we do wrong, and there are some core principles we need to stick to.
Young Libs called to principal's office
It appears that after diligent reporting by TDH Strategies (Mar, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8) and a little national attention (Mar. 5) from Paul Wells a positive resolution may be coming to the controversy that has mired the Young Liberal campus club at UBC.
Sean Holman at Public Eye Online has posted a letter from LPC(BC) Jamie Elmhirst. It seems Jamie is responding to the publicity and disgust with the YL tactics by having the LPCBC take over administration of campus club membership lists, and is promising more changes are in the works.
It’s an encouraging sign, but I’m going to keep watching with a wary eye, as I’m not completely sold. For one, Jamie is a graduate of the UViC/UBC YL mafia that perfected these kinds of tactics that he’s now pledging to clean up. I’m willing to give him the benefit of the doubt though.
But what I find distributing is the tone that runs through his letter, particularly in these excerpts here:
On a personal note, I find the situation at UBC a disappointment; both the manner in which the meeting was called and the playing out of this issue in various blogs and in the media is an embarrassment to our party and to the Young Liberals of BC. I do not consider anyone involved having entirely clean hands.
… Hopefully we will cease to see the playing out of personal rivalries on blogs and in the media in a way that is embarrassing to far more people than just those directly involved.
I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that if the blogs hadn’t shone a light onto this shady affair nothing would have happened, and Jamie would not have felt compelled to act. It would have been business a usual.
If the party had been able to respond to this situation effectively when it happened, instead of trying to cover it up, it wouldn’t have gotten a public black eye. What IS an embarrassment to the Young Liberals of BC, Jamie, is the YL leadership that allowed this situation to happen.
Attacking the whistleblower is pathetic. Want some simple advice on how to avoid negative press from someone with a little communications experience? It’s simple. Don’t do stupid things. I know TDH Strategies and Paul Wells won’t be backing down in the future, and I hope no one else will either. Democracy requires openness and transparency.
Thursday, March 09, 2006
Reaching Higher (Tuition)
Ontario's Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities held a press conference yesterday to announce he ('s allowing universities to) will be jacking-up tuition fees by up to 18 per cent over the next four years. It's as if I fell asleep and woke-up back in the Mike Harris era. Where's John "manufacture a crisis" Snobelen when you need him?
I want to focus on the policy question here, but the communications angle is hilarious. The backdrop for the minister's formal press conference announcing the lifting of the tuition freeze was a display with the words "Reaching Higher" 48 times. They also invited a group of student leaders to attend. You can guess how they reacted to the announcement. The Star's political blog has more on the communications disaster.
Now, to the policy. It's bad. Higher tuition restricts access; it's as simple as that. Student debt levels increase. The average student debt level is $20,000, and that's after grants, bursaries, and employment earnings.
In our parents' day, if they buckled down in the summer they could make enough to pay for their year. That's impossible today even with part time jobs during the year, which is tough to do as a full time student.
The average tuition for an arts student in Canada is about $4300. In Ontario it's $4881. So it's already a fair bit higher, and will only increase. When I started at Carleton in 1996 it was $3200, and four years later it was well over $4000.
The Minister said the two-year tuition freeze had become "unaffordable." I choked on that after having read this the other day in the Toronto Star, in a story talking about the possible York U subway expansion, on Ontario's upcoming budget:
Liberal insiders say corporate tax revenues are so much higher than projected that the government will have more than enough money for a high-profile investment in the TTC.
"Put it this way, (the province) is having a hard time showing a deficit this (fiscal) year," said one source, noting Duncan prefers to eliminate the budget deficit in dramatic fashion next year — just in time for the Oct. 4, 2007 provincial election.
So, let me get this straight. A tuition freeze for students is unaffordable, but to avoid showing a budgetary surplus the government is dropping $1.5 billion on a subway expansion? The (also) funny thing is the subway expansion is to a university. If you polled the student body at York U and asked them to choose between a subway in a few years, or an 18 per cent tuition hike over the next four years, I wonder what they'd choose?
I believe students should pay their fair share. I believe students do pay their fair share already. I believe government has an obligation and a duty to maintain an accessible post secondary education system, and to subsidize that system. A highly educated workforce is in its best interest. They get higher paying jobs and pay more in taxes to the government. They innovate and create jobs, which also generates tax revenue. This is an investment in our future. I thought Liberals got that kind of thing. I guess not.
This column says it well:
Students pay now, Ontario will play later
Murray Campbell
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
The angry reaction from student leaders was to be expected when Ontario Colleges and Universities Minister Chris Bentley announced yesterday that tuition fees would rise. Nobody likes to have their ox gored in such a public way.
(more)
And here's the main news piece:
Ontario hikes fees at colleges, universities
Unable to maintain freeze, province allows tuition to rise 18 per cent over four years
CAROLINE ALPHONSO
EDUCATION REPORTER; With a report from Hayley Mick
Saying the government can no longer afford a tuition freeze, Ontario raised fees yesterday for college and undergraduate university students by as much as 18 per cent over the next four years.
(more)
From spinee to spinner
It seems one of the deans of the Parliamentary Press Galley, and its best impressionist, has crossed over to the Dark Side. This hasn't gotten much press but veteran Broadcast News reporter Dan Dugas is Foreign Affairs Minister Peter McKay's new communications director.
Dugas was a popular radio reporter on the Hill for many, many years, respected by his colleagues, and known for his devastating impressions of Jean Chretien and others as the regular host of the Press Gallery Dinner. It seems though that he, too, has succumbed to the lure of spinning.
Which I have no problem with, and I wish him well. I just mention it because Tories were always up in arms when a Hill reporter took a spinner job with a Liberal minister. Susan Murray leaving the CBC's Hill bureau to work for Scott Brison comes to mind. It was used by the usual suspects as further evidence of the media's, and specifically, the CBC's, Liberal bias.
One wonders if they will trumpet Dan's move as evidence of CP/BN's Conservative bias. I doubt it. Nor should they, just like they shouldn't have when Susan jumped.
And when I said the "Dark Side" I didn't mean the Conservatives, I meant public relations. It's a half-joke journos make when one of our own crosses over into PR. It's a decision many of us face as we get older, and have families and mortgages and bills. The higher salaries of PR becomes very tempting. In the case of political reporters, their background makes a government job a natural fit. I fully understand Dan's decision and I wish him well in what is sure to be a challenging position. At least he had the good sense not to go work for Michael Fortier or David Emerson – those guys are just unspinnable.
Embassy: Just for Laughs? (scroll down)
Globe and Mail: How the Tories tripped over Hamas (second half has an account of his first day on the job)
Tuesday, March 07, 2006
Subway politics
I've lived in Toronto for just over seven months now and I can't say I've followed or care much about local municipal politics. Or even provincial politics for that matter. But as a regular transit user, transit is one local issue I care about. That's why I was disappointed to read in Metro this morning (on the bus, of course) that the province is funding the York University subway extension.
I'm disappointed because this will almost certainly be at the expense of a much-needed replacement of the ageing, unreliable and soon to be obsolete RT service linking the subway at Kennedy Station out to Scarborough. There just isn't the money to do both.
Now I live (for the time being, hope to move downtown this summer) and work in Scarborough, so I obviously have my bias in this. But all the evidence I've seen, from rider surveys and projections to facts, favours replacing the Scarborough RT (an elevated service a la Vancouver's Skytrain) with an expansion of subway service to McCowan. More people use the RT then are projected to use the York U line, and were it not for the hassle of having to transfer from the subway to the RT many more would use the line as well. Also, the RT is rapidly nearing the end of its lifespan, so something will have to be done to replace it, and it is also notoriously unreliable in the winter. My understanding is that it was never intended to be permanent, and was chosen over regular subway service because it was cheaper in the short term and, of course, for politics. The cars were to be built in Ontario.
Which brings us, of course, to the reason why the York U line is being funded instead of the Scarborough line: Politics. As this article makes clear Dalton McGuinty wants to pick-up and hold seats in the 905 belt/York Region. I guess he feels his Scarborough seats are safe.
Playing politics with transit makes for bad policy. To throw in the requisite B.C. content, just remember Glen Clark's decision to fund the Millennium Line Skytrain expansion through his riding, instead of building service out to UBC. Last time I rode that route I often has a car to myself.
Ah, well. At least I have that transit tax credit to look forward too, right Stephen?
Cash for new subway?
Province set to unveil funding for York U link
York University subway line is expected in the March 23 provincial budget, the Toronto Star has learned.
Sources say Finance Minister Dwight Duncan will use his first budget to announce the $1.5 billion, 6.2-kilometre extension of the Toronto Transit Commission’s Spadina line from Downsview station to York’s Keele campus.
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
UPDATE
An Inside Toronto story look at the prospects for Scarborough, and in a Toronto Sun piece Mayor David Miller warns York might not be a go after all.
Monday, March 06, 2006
"Disgracing" a meeting of "white nationalists"
Found this story via The Tyee and thought I'd share it. Apparently, a small group of "right-wing Jews" were attending a biennial gathering of "white nationalist" types in Virginia recently, and every thing was going peachy whitey-keen until former KKK leader David Duke took the stage and brought the anti-Semitism.
"There is a power in the world that dominates our media, influences our government and that has led to the internal destruction of our will and our spirit," Duke said.
"Tell us, tell us," came a call from the back of the room.
"I'm not going to say it," Duke said to rising laughter.
And he didn't really have to. Everyone knew whom he was talking about…
But Michael Hart, a squat, balding Jewish astrophysicist from Maryland, was not amused. He rose from his seat, strode toward Duke (who loomed over him like an Aryan giant), spit out a curse — "You f...ing Nazi, you've disgraced this meeting" — and exited.
Isn't that something? I hate to laugh when it comes to issues as serious as racism and anti-Semitism, but I couldn't help myself here. Yes, it was the anti-Semitism that disgraced that meeting. Up until then everything was really respectable, I'm sure.
Saturday, March 04, 2006
More on the UBC Young Liberal scandal
TDH Strategies has been doing a good job in recent days of documenting the scandal brewing with the Young Liberal club at the University of British Columbia. This letter from Braeden Caley was passed on to me from a friend in B.C., I’m sure they wouldn’t mind if I post it here.
You can also get more background on this situation at TDH. For myself I’ll just say this kind of underhanded politics, lack of ethics and just downright asholiness is quite in line with my experience with the Young Liberal organization in B.C. There’s a culture of entitlement there, and it carries-on into the regular organization as well. They’re all about politics for politics’ sake and winning whatever the cost. Anything to win, no matter how undemocratic or underhanded. I really don’t think many of them came into politics with any firm convictions or principles, other than power.
Back during the leadership race (if you can call it that) I got a call from one of the Young Liberal/Youth for Martin organizers (same thing really). They wanted me to be president of a couple of newly created college campus clubs in my riding. But I’m not a student, I said. Doesn’t matter, they said. What would I have to do? Nothing, just call a couple of founding AGMs and pass some constitutions, we’ll send them to you. Where would I have these AGMs? Just have them in your apartment. I live in a small one bedroom. Doesn’t matter, they said, no one will show up. So, I said, you want me to by myself hold AGMs for non-existent campus clubs in my apartment for schools I’m not a student at and where I’m the only person in attendance? Yep, pretty much, then just send us the minutes to make it official.
You see, every additional campus club got to send delegates to the leadership convention. And every vote was needed, you know, just in case Sheila made a run somehow. They didn’t just want to win, they wanted to crush her. I’m no Sheila fan, but this race had been decided years ago. These kinds of tactics were stupid and unnecessary. What’s more, no local delegates would actually be elected by these clubs. The spots would be filled by delegates from Vancouver and Victoria, where enough spots weren’t available locally. Anyway, they ended up finding someone else to be their paper president, so I was off the hook. And a few Lower Mainland delegates did end up going to Toronto as youth delegates from these campus clubs.
I’ll save the story of how I was screwed out of attending the convention by these people and was yelled at and insulted over the phone by a senior organizer for another day. For now, here’s Braeden's letter. I think the only way to fight this kind of crap is publicity.
*****
Dear Friends,
As some of you may know, the AGM for the UBC Young Liberals was called this week. The decision that was made to call this AGM in this manner invalidates the voting rights of 77 new members who signed up to be part of renewing the party and who support my potential campaign for President, which has been dealt a blow from which I'm not sure how to recover. If fact, the undemocratic manner in which events have played out has left many Young Liberals disillusioned and the entire process seems to be in shambles.
I feel that it's important for members to know what has taken place this week. Here's a timeline of what has transpired so far:
DISCUSSIONS:
After first meeting with YLCBC President Coco Lefoka on Monday to express my interest in running, I sat down with Coco again on Tuesday to discuss the upcoming UBC AGM, this time accompanied by Taylor Briggs. Coco proposed that one of us be President and the other Vice President. Taylor pointed out that this was his last chance to be president, while I raised the point that I had been actively involved in the club much longer, and objected to trading away a vice presidency without speaking to the incumbent, Michael Crook. Coco also told us the AGM should be called Friday to avoid having this drag on, but we all agreed to meet the next day to discuss the situation further.
MEMBERSHIP HEADACHES:
I tried contacting Jon Loewen, the UBC Membership chair, who is responsible for processing membership forms, to no avail. Members had been signing up over the past few weeks in preparation for the possibility that I might run. I also tried to contact Sana Shahram and Coco, but he refused to accept membership forms saying he believed it could somehow be a "conflict of interest." I ended up having to resort to dropping off 77 memberships at Jon Loewen's house before midnight on Tuesday, Feb 28th. To Jon's credit, I did eventually receive email acknowledgement of the forms and the attendant money.
NEGOTIATIONS STOP:
Coco called me only about half an hour before the scheduled meeting on March 1 to abruptly cancel.
CONFUSION! AWKWARD AGM CALL:
The AGM was called by President Sana Shahram initially for Wednesday, March 8th, 4-5:30pm; this call was made at 3:20 pm on March 1. Oddly, a second notice was sent out at 3:42 pm changing the meeting call to Thursday March 9th from 4-5:30pm - Presumably and unfortunately then, there was little interest in having a fair fight or any meaningful discussion beforehand. The goal was simply to stop me from running, as they saw that I had support that might out do their own. By calling the AGM for the 9th they invalidated the votes of nearly 80 new members to the club as well as 3 current executive members who will be unable to vote or run for re-election.
SERIOUS CONCERNS:
I have serious concerns about how a club that has no solid membership procedures or reliable list can conduct an AGM fairly and I have serious concerns about how we can have an AGM after two notices have now been sent out indicating two different days of voting (first Wednesday, then corrected to indicate Thursday). This problem has also arisen in the past and it has not been sufficiently addressed even after members of the executive have raised concerns a number of times over the past year.
In addition and probably most importantly, there is much talk in the party right now of renewal and debate and rebuilding. It is foolish to think that we can build an open and inclusive party where people have a reason to be excited if at every opportunity doors are slammed in the face of those who hope to make a difference. I think every measure should have been taken to enfranchise these new members. These are people who would like to get involved in our club and who share our values. The fact that their involvement and energy would be turned away with such little regard for the value of their voice and contribution saddens and concerns me.
It is certainly not a democratic move.
Much debate in our party has centred around how to increase the perceived value of a Liberal party membership. I think the best way to do this would be to stop thinking of our members as names and numbers on paper, and to start thinking of our members as real, living, breathing, thinking people with a valid contribution to make. This takes inclusion and enfranchisement. After all, a party isn't very much fun if everyone isn't invited.
MOVING FORWARD:
At this point, I am really unsure what I intend to do next. As I think you know, I've worked my guts out for this party for the last half decade, and have attended UBC Young Liberal meetings since before I even set foot on this campus as a student. I've invested a great deal in democracy, including a campaign for School trustee in Richmond that earned me the support of nearly 7000 voters, and I have done a great deal to strengthen this party, and raise youth voices to their fullest potential. For examples of this, see Coco Lefoka's endorsement of me for the national Young Liberal of the Year Award (attached below).
All I would like is a chance to do more, but I am really not interested in participating in a process as unproductive and undemocratic as this one may be shaping up to be. I am not prepared to see myself, any of you or other friends, or any more enthusiastic and energetic Young Liberals get any more disillusioned by all of this. I like and have enjoyed working with Coco Lefoka and Sana Shahram. However, these sorts of undemocratic practices must come to an end if we want the Young Liberals to be respected, and if the party as a whole wants to win elections ever again. Please let me know where you think I should go from here.
Many thanks,
-Braeden
Braeden Caley
braedencaley@hotmail.com
Young Liberal of the Year (Award Nomination by Coco Lefoka) 2005
Dear Awards Committee,
It is with great pride and honor that I nominate Braeden Caley for the YoungLiberal of the Year Award.
I have had the opportunity to work with Braeden for the past year since he joined the Young Liberals at UBC as a first year student. And I must tell you that never in my years as a Young Liberal have I known any individual with the idealism, leadership, intelligence, and integrity of Braeden. His achievements are notable and commendable given that he is only seventeen years of age.
Braeden's involvement in the young liberals began at a young age when he joined the Party when he was fourteen. When most his age were concerned with the other distractions Braeden enrolled himself in something I believe every citizen has a responsibility to enroll in, public service. Braeden's strong involvement with the Richmond riding association has won him the trust, respect and loyalty of leaders in the riding.
Braeden's first major achievement was playing an integral role in shaping public opinion through letter writing campaigns in local media that effectively articulated the Liberal Party of Canada's values and vision for Canada. Hisefforts contributed to the Party's defense during times when the media and public opinion were heavily critical of the Liberal Party. Braeden was at the cornerstone in raising public awareness of the Party's outstanding successes in public policy while in government, when the media was heavily focused on the sponsorship scandal and other issues.
Braeden has been integral to YLCBC's campaign on same sex marriage and missile defense. Earlier this month Braeden led and organized a very successful rally for same sex marriage held at the Vancouver Court House. Braeden established a network of community advocacy groups that worked in collaboration on the rally. The rally, which gained significant coverage from local ethnic media helped raise awareness to the debate being a Charter issue and dispelled the myths of the Conservative Party campaign on the issue.
Braeden is a true Liberal, a committed fighter to the pursuit of a society that is governed by the principles of equality, fairness and multiculturalism. His personal values and commitment to our cause are inspiring.
I feel the Young Liberal of the Year Award could go to no better qualified and deserving a person than Braeden Caley.
Sincerely,
Letlotlo Coco Lefoka
Friday, March 03, 2006
CBC: Ethics watchdog will investigate Harper
The CBC is reporting Ethics Commissioner Bernard Sharpiro will investigate Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his conduct in inducing former Liberal David Emerson to cross the floor and join his cabinet.
Said Shapiro: "...the subject of this inquiry is the prime minister..."
Oh, the fun questions this raises. Here's just two, off the top of my head:
1/ Will Harper find the time to speak with with Shaprio in person, or will he send his latest lobbyist turned communications director to speak for him instead?
2/ Will Harper resign until the results of the investigation are released?
Well, back to (pretending to) work, but that was fun!
Ethics watchdog to examine conduct of Harper, Emerson
Last Updated Fri, 03 Mar 2006 15:11:45 EST
CBC News
The federal ethics commissioner says he is opening a preliminary inquiry into conflict-of-interest allegations against Prime Minister Stephen Harper concerning his formerly Liberal cabinet minister David Emerson.
Emerson ran as a Liberal in the campaign leading up to the Jan. 23 general election, but was a surprise appointment to Harper's Conservative cabinet on Feb. 6.
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Thursday, March 02, 2006
Emerson earns an Olympic DNF
Actually, make that a Did Not Show Up.
Remember the reasons the Conservatives and the turncoat himself gave for David Emerson's crossing the floor to the comfy, fur-lined welcome mat of Stephen Harper's cabinet?
The government needed a voice from Vancouver (the suburbs don't count, sorry James Moore), especially with the 2010 Games coming to Vancouver-Whistler. Emerson would be the government point man on the file, and was named Minister responsible.
It would seem natural then that, as the federal Minister responsible for the games, and as the federal Minister for Vancouver, he'd be there Tuesday when the official Olympic flag was raised at Vancouver City Hall, right? After all, it's a pretty big deal, marking the official beginning of the countdown to 2010. His provincial counterpart found time to make it.
Unfortunately though, David didn't show. Apparently he was in Ottawa and terribly busy in meetings and what not, and wasn't available for media comment (perhaps he got caught in that notorious Ottawa traffic, and the phone in his limo wasn't working?).
He did send a lovely statement though, saying, "that the flag-raising ceremony is a proud Olympic tradition." Just not proud enough, I guess, for him to get on a plane. I'm sure Gen. Hillier could have gassed-up a Challenger for him.
Was David perhaps afraid of confronting his constituents (those he hasn't had arrested) who are peeved at his betrayal by crossing the floor? Or maybe he didn't want to face difficult questions about the additional $55 million 2010 organizers are looking for from the feds, and that Emerson has been hemming and hawing on.
So, let's see. David crossed the floor to be the Vancouver guy and the 2010 guy, but he's too busy to attend major 2010 events in Vancouver. Why else did he cross over? Oh right, to solve softwood lumber. But wait, didn't he recuse himself from the softwood lumber file for being in a conflict of interest relating to his Canfor pension? So much for that one too.
Seems like you have time to run in that by-election you're "sure you'd win" after all David. Or you could just pick up your marbles and go home. The world will keep on turning without you at the cabinet table.
Wednesday, March 01, 2006
The award for making an ass of yourselves by failing to do even basic research goes to…
The Canadian Taxpayers Federation! Congratulations to Ann Coulter wannabe and CTF Ontario director Tasha Kherididdin, and all the little people that made her unsurprising victory possible.
The CTF is honoured for the following entry in their annual Teddies Waste Awards, awarded on Parliament Hill today to “give the people who fleece Canadian taxpayers the recognition they so richly deserve.” Here’s one of their “nominees”:
Good Night, and Good Luck (Finding the Paperwork) -- Nominated For: Achievement in Special Effects
In this tale, a $132,000 contract is awarded by the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development to Ottawa-based Totem Hill Inc on an “oral” basis. Paperwork? Negative. Value for money? No idea. Taxpayers getting hosed by an out-of-control federal department? Affirmative.
A leading actress for the department says the contract complies with all the rules. And on this point the movie takes a powerful turn when former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien enters to verify the contract’s legitimacy with one of his all time famous quips: “A proof is a proof. What kind of proof? It’s a proof. A proof is proof. And when you have a good proof, it’s because it is proven.”
It’s ironic they would name this nomination for a movie that chronicles the fight of one of the giants of journalism against McCarthyism. You don’t need to be Edward R. Murrow to know a little basic research before running the story is a good idea.
The movie's tagline is "You got it right." And the CTF got it so wrong. As I blogged here two months ago. Or perhaps they might have caught the reality check that ran during the campaign on the CBC National news. Former minister Andy Scott wrote Harper a letter about it, perhaps he should have cc’d the CTF.
To briefly recap: Paperwork? Positive. I don’t have the PDF document anymore and the link on the Liberal site is dead, but hundreds of pages are publicly available, Tasha, and have been for many, many months. Call up your friend, Jim Prentice. He’ll e-mail them to you. Value for money? Maybe you should try READING the reports before you decide. Taxpayers being lied to by a lobby group shilling for the Conservatives? You betcha.
Oh, and by the way Tasha, the Chretien “proof” quote wasn’t talking about contracts, but the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, before the invasion by your hero George W. Bush that your leader Mr. Harper would have had Canada join.
Thanks for coming out.
Raising Liberal membership fees? Well that's stupid
My on the ground political experience came as a riding association executive member in British Columbia, and being on the ground in a rural riding it offered an interesting perspective on the schism between the Vancouver/Victoria-dominated party apparatus and the rural ridings.
The urban/rural divide aside however (and I'm sure it's the same in Ontario with Toronto vs. the rest of the province, for example) a far greater disconnect existed (and no doubt still does) between the LPCBC party executive and the grassroots, as represented by the riding association presidents.
I bring the topic up because I see Sean Hollman at Public Eye Online has posted the details of the next BC Federal Liberal Council meeting, this Saturday at the Plaza 500 Hotel in Vancouver. The Federal Council includes the LPCBC executive and the BC riding association presidents. Being numerically superior, in theory the riding association presidents could wield a fair bit of power. If they ever chose to use it. Think of them as the House of Commons to the executive's minority government.
The executive will be looking to use Saturday's meeting to rubberstamp some changes to the membership rules. By way of brief background, the Martinite LPCBC was brought into disrepute during the leadership wars for both sharply restricting access to forms by non-believers and being very lax with the koolaiders. There were huge groups of people on the list at the same addresses that knew nothing about it; there was a dog in Victoria that got a Christmas card from Paul Martin. The media had a field day. Rules were tightened around creating a paper trail and restricting cash payments as a result.
On to the proposed changes. The first is to increase the number of forms any member can be issued at one time from five to ten. Why not 20 I say, but a step in the right direction. As long as it's followed of course. I heard stories of people having a hard time getting their five, depending on where their allegiances lay. It is also mentioned the LPC is working on allowing online membership signup. It's high time, the LPC has lagged far behind on using the Web for both membership and fundraising.
Here's the more controversial change though. They want to raise membership fees from $5 to $10/year for youth and from $10 to $20/year for adults. LPCBC prez Jamie Elmhirst says:
"This, we believe, is reflective of a desire in the party to place a higher value on a Liberal Party membership card."
Umm, here's an idea. Want to place a higher value on a Liberal Party membership card? Try having a fair, open and vibrant leadership race that proposes innovative, dynamic policies, and start paying some respect to the grassroots grunts that are the workhorses of the party between and during election campaigns. That would be a start.
With all that has gone on it hasn't exactly gotten easier to sign people up for the Liberal Party. Do we really want to double membership fees as well? Our brand is tainted; it's just plain stupid.
Give Jamie credit though, at least he does say what this is really about:
"It also is designed to at least partially recoup funds that will be lost due to a drop in our per vote money from Elections Canada so that the party office can continue to deliver a high level of service to ridings and party members."
I'm annoyed that the LPCBC gets all the revenue from membership fees in the first place. I don't know how it works in other provinces or with other parties, but in BC Liberal riding associations don't get a penny from membership sales, even though the vast majority of sales happen at the riding level. All that cash goes to the LPCBC.
Also, all of the per vote subsidy from Elections Canada also goes to the LPC and the LPCBC. The riding associations get none of that money. Hardly seems fair, does it?
The executive will counter, 'well, after campaign finance reform the central party can't fundraise, that's strictly the domain of the riding associations, and the corporations are now all yours.' Well sure, but how many corporate head offices are in 100 Mile House or Port Hardy? That's great for Vancouver and Victoria area ridings, but it does nothing for the rural associations.
It's time for the riding associations to stand up and say 'this isn't fair, we aren't going to accept this inequity anymore.' The way to start is by vetoing this stupid idea to double membership fees. If the LPCBC has a cash crunch let them present a budget and the federal council can help them identify places to cut.
If our party it's going to be reformed it's time to start doing things differently. There's power in numbers, and it's time for the grassroots to stand up to the party aristocracy and flex its muscle.
P.S. If you're going to be in the area Saturday (and want to pay the unspecified entry fee) the meeting is open to the (paying) public. Rumour is Stephane Dion will be making an apperance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
