When I woke-up this morning (far too early for a weekend frankly) one of the first things I did was check the night’s delegate selection results on the Liberal Web site. While I was pleasantly surprised at the strength of my man Dion (second place baby!), I did wonder though: should this feature even be available?
I have to say I haven’t come down on either side yet. On the plus it certainly generates interest, excitement and buzz. It also serves to help counter some of the speculation, rumour and spin that would be circulating without this official but unofficial central results board with some unofficial not quite facts.
On the other hand, its results over the weekend will potentially be misleading because of any number of reasons, regional strengths being chief among them. They could change signifigantly. The many rural ridings voting by mail-in ballot won't be counted until late next week. Also, two days of voting remain. I worry, much like Elections Canada does during general elections, will someone who, say, sees their favoured candidate well back this morning switch their vote to a frontrunner?
I’d be interested in hearing your thoughts. One thing I think we can all agree on though: whether it’s a good idea or not, I think we’ll all be refreshing that page often this weekend.
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Live leadership results, a good idea or a bad idea? Discuss
Friday, September 29, 2006
Why Stephane?
Well, it's super-duper delegate selection weekend. The excitement is, well…it's super weekend. It will be interesting, anyway, and at least brings us one step closer to the end of this marathon process, when we can finally reunite as Liberals and focus once more on taking down the Conservatives.
As people will be going to the polls this weekend, or their mailboxes, I felt it was appropriate to re-run my endorsement post of Stephane Dion that I wrote back in May, just after the LPC(O) convention, when I decided to give him my support.
Over the four months since (seems like so much longer) my reasons and convictions for supporting him haven't changed; if anything, they have only been strengthened as I have watched his impressive performance on the campaign trail and learned more about his policy propoals. I believe now, more than ever, that he's the right person to unite the Liberal Party and lead us to victory against Stephen Harper, Gilles Duceppe and Jack Layton.
Also, he's a dog man. I know Harper's a cat fancier and that's fine, I guess. But isn't it time we had a dog running around 24 Sussex again? And look how cute the puppy is!
I wish a fine super weekend to all, and I wish good luck to all the candidates and their campaigns. No matter whom you support, I hope all Liberals will come out and make their voices heard.
P.S. I still don't have a button. :)
BCer's pick: Stephane Dion
After a lot of careful thought and consideration of all the candidates, their pros and cons and the political landscape I’ve finally made my decision: I think Stephane Dion is the right person to be the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.
This wasn’t an easy decision, as it is such a quality field of candidates.
Why Stephane?
I’ve liked Stephane for a while, and I think I was one of the earlier people in blogland to float his name as someone who should run.
He wasn’t seen as a serious candidate at that point and I’m glad to see that has changed, and in a big way. When I went to his hospitality suite Saturday night ready to put on a Dion button the room was packed and they were out of buttons, they’d been surprised by the demand. MP Bryan Wilfert was able to find me a sticker; hopefully I can find a button soon.
In January when I floated his name the only reservations I had about Stephane were these: does he have the “royal jelly” to inspire and excite, and can he make the transition from loyal lieutenant to leader. Watching his performance over the past few weeks, and this weekend, I can now say the answer to both questions is a definite yes.
You could see him change during his speech Friday night. He started off a bit nervously, the English a bit awkward, but as he got going you could see the passion building as he talked about the need to add a third pillar, environmental sustainability, to the Liberal pillars of social justice and fiscal management and the audience buying-in to that vision.
Stephane is committed to the party, and wasn’t part of any of the Chretien/Martin feuding. He was a loyal minister for Jean Chretien, tackling the difficult unity file, taking on the separatists and steering through the Clarity Act. When called on by Paul Martin he worked hard to help salvage Liberal fortunes in Quebec in 2004, and did a great job in the environmental portfolio. He's succeeded in every file he's been given, and I think now he's ready to get the filing cabinet.
What about Quebec?
The big question people seem to have about Stephane is can he win in Quebec? Don't they hate him there because of the Clarity Act stuff? I think he can be successful for us in Quebec. I'm not a Quebec expert, but here's my theory.
Do some people not like him in Quebec? Sure. It's the same people that didn't like Jean Chretien. It's the soft-nationalist/separatist elite, and I don't see them voting Liberal anyway. Paul Martin and Jean Lapierre tried to go after that vote and it didn't work; recognizing that in the 2004 campaign they called in Dion to shore-up our federalist base.
We're never going to sweep Quebec. The BQ isn't going anywhere; the Tories are back and aren't leaving either. But they're both going after the same soft nationalist piece of the pie. Let them fight over it, because we can have the federalist piece of the pie for ourselves. Let's be that strong federalist voice again, that passionate defender of Quebec's proud place in a strong and united Canada, that unapologetic defender of Canada. And who better to do it than the champion of plan b, the guy that stood toe to toe with the separatists and wouldn't blink?
The right person at the right time
I think Stephane Dion is the leader the Liberal Party needs right now. He's unscathed by the party infighting and any ethical issues and has always been there when needed, he has experience in government on both domestic and international files and his intelligence and honesty would be a breath of fresh air. He refuses to back down in a debate, but he does it not with confrontation and smears, but with intellect and wit. I'd love to see him wipe the floor with Stephan Harper in a debate, and you could charge admission to see him joust with Gilles Duceppe.
Also, I think his message of adding a third pillar, environmental sustainability, to the Liberal pillars of social justice and fiscal management really resonates with Canadians. The environment is going to be THE issue for the 21st Century. It also brings our party back to the Centre/Left, where I'm more comfortable and where, as I've blogged in the past, I think we need to be.
For these reasons and more, I'll be supporting Stephane Dion for the leadership of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Thursday, September 28, 2006
And who is Jean Lapierre endorsing?
I must admit, I smiled when I read this story this morning. In what the National Post calls "a blow" to Stephane Dion, former Liberal MP and cabmin Liza Frulla is backing Michael Ignatieff because she believes only he can defeat the BQ. Well, colour me surprised.
She says only Ignatieff can woo disgruntled Francophones that feel a "malaise" toward the type of Canada they are currently being offered. She said Dion doesn't have intensity and passion and can't keep a cool head (nice contradiction) and clearly doesn't like his lack of enthusiasm for wacky constitutional adventures.
As I said, I'm not surprised. I've already indicated my issues with Ignatieff's constitutional musings, but I'd like to step back from that and take a higher level view.
I'm no Quebec expert, but here's how I have viewed the Liberal approach to Quebec over the past 10-15 years. Jean Chretien sleep-walked through most of the last referendum, then he woke up barely in time. After the election, he took a two-pronged approach. Some concessions and new powers for Quebec combined with the get tough approach of the Clarity Act and the Supreme Court reference. His point man? Stephane Dion.
With the get tough approach found favour in the rest of Canada and amongst most staunch federalists in Quebec, it wasn't favoured by all Liberals and the provincial Liberal establishment in Quebec (they that kept Chretien out of the referendum as it cratered because they knew better). Prominently among them, many of Paul Martin's advisors and chief among his Quebec advisors, soft nationalists like Liza Frulla and Jean Lapierre, the latter who left the Liberals after Martin lost the leadership to Chretien to join the BQ, but was wooed back when Martin became leader.
Martin and his team favoured the appeasement approach to separatism, and set out to change Liberal policy on Quebec when they took power. Dion was booted from cabinet, and Lapierre became Martin's Quebec lieutenant. The clarity act was dismissed, promises of concessions were made. The result? The Quebec campaign they ran in 2004 was a disaster, the polling showed a trainwreck in the making. Who did they call in from the bench to save the day mid-campaign? Stephane Dion, who was rewarded after the election with the Environment portfolio for his efforts touring the province to stop the bleeding.
I tell this story not to slag anyone, but merely to illustrate there are two different approaches to the issue of Quebec separatism, and in my view the approach advocated and implemented by Ms. Frulla was a spectacular failure. Her and Dion have diametrically opposed views on the subject, so I find her rejection of Dion neither surprising nor cause for concern.
As I've stated before, the BQ is here to stay and they're not going anyway. While separatism is at its core, most of its supporters aren't separatists but nationalists and supporters of decentralization. Lots of the latter in the Cons, for that matter. The Cons are also back in Quebec and aren't going anyway. What it means is the days of the Liberals racking-up huge pluralities in Quebec are over, and they aren't coming back.
So, what should our approach in this new Quebec political climate? Do we join the BQ and the Cons, who are both fighting for that same separatist/soft nationalist piece of the pie? I say let them fight over that piece of the pie. The Liberal party can and should be the strong and passionate federalist party, defender of Quebec's place in a strong, united Canada. Right now, that federalist ground is wide open, let's grab it.
People say Dion is unpopular in Quebec, but the fact is the people that don't like him are those soft nationalists voting BQ and Conservative, they're not going to vote Liberal. He's immensely popular amongst federalists BECAUSE of his time as intergovernmental affairs minister, so who better to be the federalist champion than Stephane Dion?
So not getting Ms. Frulla's endorsement is hardly a "blow" as the Post claims. More of a compliment really. I wonder who Jean Lapierre is endorsing?
UPDATE: Here's a much shorter, and slightly more snarky, take from Paul Wells:
So the people who thought Paul Martin was the key to victory in Quebec think Michael Ignatieff is the key to victory in Quebec?
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
A BCer exclusive: Shocking Liberal leadership scandal!
I do this with a heavy heart, but I have always tried to approach this blog journalistically. And so as a journalist, and as a loyal Liberal, I feel I have no choice but to bring this information to light before this weekend's delegate selection meetings.
When I first received this e-mail tip from a reader I was skeptical, but as I diligently conducted my own research over the past week and I examined the evidence I realized that I could only come to one, inescapable conclusion: During the 1970s, at the height of the Cold War, Ken Dryden was a secret agent for Soviet intelligence.
Whether he was working for the KGB or the GRU (Soviet military intelligence) is unclear, but the fact he was working for Soviet intelligence is clear.
For example much evidence is available, if you look for it, on the public record that indicates in the fall of 1972, when he should have been preparing for the upcoming NHL season, Dryden visited the Soviet capital of Moscow for more than one week. What were you doing in the capital of our enemy, Mr. Dryden? Hmm?
What's more, during his trip to Moscow, documentary evidence indicates Dryden was seen in the presence of several officers of the Soviet Red Army, including one Vladislav Tretiak, who retired from the Red Army in the 1980s with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Tretiak received high Soviet military honours, including the Order of Lenin in 1978 and the Order of the Red Banner in 1984. Perhaps rewards for his fine handling of his star Canadian spy?
I don't like having to do this, but is important for Mr. Dryden to come clean about his espionage record BEFORE Liberals vote for the leadership this weekend. Mr. Dryden, what secrets did you pass to our enemies? Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist party?
Major hat tip to "Kenneth Dryden" for putting me onto this shocking story.
Watch for my future exposes, where I reveal that Bob Rae used to be, gasp, the NDP Premier of Ontario, and also that Michael Ignatieff has apparently spent some time outside Canada in recent years. Still chasing that one down; it seems he might have written some books too.
Lessons in being Prime Ministerial, Chapter one
Today I bring you Chapter One in Lessons in Being Prime Ministerial with the Prime Minister of Canada, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper.
Speaking to reporters in Romania, where the Francophonie summit officially opens on Thursday, Mr. Harper said that Mr. Martin approved the current mission and should not criticize it.
"The fact Mr. Martin is incapable of sticking by his decisions explains why he is no longer the prime minister of Canada," Mr. Harper said.
Shorter Stephen Harper:
"Na na na boo boo, I won, you lost, you're smelly, ha ha!" Mr. Harper said.
This brings to an end chapter one in Lessons in Being Prime Ministerial with Stephen Harper.
To briefly analyze the validity of Harper's comments though, I went back to try and find what Martin had said that got Steve-o so hot and bothered, because I didn't recall hearing anything. Finally I found this Toronto Star piece, read for yourself some of the "criticism" Martin levelled:
"I'm the person who sent them there and I don't back away from that one iota."
Yeah, that sure sounds like he's not sticking by his decision Steve. Here's some more:
But he made it plain that the ongoing mission is not the one he approved.
"I approved a 3-D approach," he said, referring to what military planners also call the "whole government approach," involving diplomacy, defence and development.
"We are doing the defence," he said. "In fact we are doing the defence quite aggressively — and you can't do it passively.
"But are we doing the amount of reconstruction, the amount of aid that I believe was part of the original mission? The answer unequivocally is that we're not. And I believe that we should."
Gee, a little context sure makes your little temper-tantrum look pretty pathetic, doesn't it Steve? Go find another strawman to attack.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Weapons concealment made safe, easy AND comfortable!
As a journalist, a lot of weird press releases and pitches cross my desk. Many of them even have absolutely nothing to do with my coverage area: enterprise technology.
My favourite off-topic pitch was from a company selling bobble head dolls of poker players. Do they also serve as a WiFi hotspot, I asked?
Now, though, a new completely insane press release/pitch has taken the top spot from the poker dolls: designer jeans that allow you to carry a concealed handgun or knife. From an American company? You betcha. I give you the full release below, and be sure to visit the Web site, it manages to be crazy, hilarious and frightening all at the same time.
------
NEW TREND REVEALED: NOW EVERYONE CAN CARRY CONCEALED WITHOUT USING A
HOLSTER
Dateline: September 26, 2006 ... North, SC
Contact: Jane Collins
Phone: (803)568-2444
E-mail: sales@totersjeans.com
Web Address: http://www.totersjeans.com
NORTH, SC - September 26, 2006 - For sportsmen, law enforcement personnel and thers who carry concealed, holsters can be a nuisance. And unfortunately, most brands of jeans are not designed for carrying handguns, knives or other concealed products. That's why a new trend has been sweeping the nation - designer-style jeans that also happen to be concealed carry clothing.
Recently, a veteran holster and knife designer named Blackie Collins revealed the amazing Toters jeans. Collins wanted to develop jeans that were very similar to designer jeans in comfort and durability. The new jeans would need to feel right while also concealing a knife or handgun in the safe and proper way.
"One thing I noticed about the front 'holster' pockets and the knife pockets was that they have heavy duty rivets on the corner stress points. This makes a lot of sense. I have to tell you, these jeans are designed to take a lot of abuse!" states Jim Schmidt in a review printed by Concealed Carry Magazine.
Each pair of Toters has a pocket holstering system designed for left or right-hand carry along with a full size second pocket compartment. The holster pockets as well as the back pockets are lined with Cordura Plus, a super-strength fabric that will not imprint. There are also two leg pockets positioned to insure their contents are in place for quick, easy access.
Sportsmen are able to carry their handguns, knives and other items concealed while hunting, playing, sitting standing, working or even riding motorcycles. The holsters are a part of the jeans, allowing for comfort and safety while engaging in many activities.
Concealed carry jeans aren't the only trend in the making. A new companion vest will be released soon with holstering pockets on both sides. These two garments combined provide a convenient way for anyone to carry concealed.
"These jeans are great. They combine the look and feel of designer jeans with the ruggedness and reliability of my duty gear," states Toters customer, Chris Glover.
Sportsmen and others who prefer to not wear a holster may finally see their dreams become a reality with this new trend of concealed carry clothing. Toters jeans and vests are sure to set a new standard in the way people carry concealed.
More information about Toters can be found at their website:
http://www.totersjeans.com
For an interview or more information, please contact Jane Collins at (803)568-2444 or email: sales@totersjeans.com
Feschuk is back!
Why did nobody tell me blogger boy Scott Feschuk is back in the blogsphere?! Apperantly he's writing a daily humourous news summary for Macleans.ca. I just came accross it this morning, and it is freakin hilarious.
I've got some more catching-up, and laughing, to do, but here's one item I burst a gut on:
Gotta go read that new book by Chretien aide Eddie Goldenberg. Not sure if I've got this right but he says Paul Martin was in Dallas in the fall of '63. Liked to take his coffee on the grassy knoll apparently.
Welcome back Scott!
Monday, September 25, 2006
You didn't actually think he'd quit, did you?
Seriously guys, somebody wake me in December…
JOAN BRYDEN
OTTAWA (CP) - Mud is starting to fly fast and furiously in the Liberal leadership race with allegations of membership irregularities spreading from Joe Volpe to presumed front-runner Michael Ignatieff.
A complaint has been filed with the Liberal party about 60 members allegedly signed up improperly by Ignatieff's camp in two Toronto-area ridings, including one man in Ignatieff's constituency said to have died two years ago.
The complaint, filed Monday with the Ontario wing of the party, comes on the heels allegations that Volpe's team improperly signed up scores of members in Montreal.
Rumours were rife that Volpe was going to exit the leadership race, but he held a news conference Monday to announce that he plans to hang in.
(more)
Reopening a constitutional can of worms…
Nearly everything I have tried or wanted to say on Michael Ignatieff's constitutional musings Lysiane Gagnon says far more eloquently than I have in the Globe today:
LYSIANE GAGNON
From Monday's Globe and Mail
It is an illusion to believe that constitutional reform, and the recognition of Quebec as a nation, could ensure a federalist victory if there were another referendum on sovereignty. Michael Ignatieff, one of the leading contenders in the race for the Liberal leadership, made a dangerous error of judgment when he promised to reopen this Pandora's Box. The process of reforming the Constitution to accommodate Quebec would be long and agonizing, probably doomed from the start and, whatever the result, it would provide more fuel for the sovereigntist camp.
(more)
Sunday, September 24, 2006
There's a little Bob Rae in all of us
So, apparently Bob Rae has reinforced his view that ideas aren’t that important, and that we’re electing a leader, not an agenda. Needless to say, much tut tutting has ensued across the Liberal blogsphere.
But really, who are we to get upset about Rae stating what would seem to be obvious to anyone that has followed the Liberal Party of Canada over the past, oh, let’s say, forever? When have we ever been the party of ideas? Have we not always been the party of power for power’s sake? Was it not just weeks ago that people were lamenting the lack of a Pierre Trudeau, a charismatic leader, in this race?
I think leadership races SHOULD be about ideas, about an agenda. I think our leadership race NEEDS to be about ideas, and about an agenda. But they haven't ever been. It’s up to us to make that happen, and we haven’t yet. It’s like the people that tell pollsters they’re outraged about gory photos in the newspaper, and yet buy a copy when they see those photos on the front page. We’re not being honest with ourselves.
Our history shows we don’t care about ideas. We care about electability, charisma, winability. We want that messiah to lead us back to the promised land. That’s true at all levels of the party. Look at the lack of policy similarity between endorsers and their endorsees and it’s obvious. Leadership races aren’t about ideas because we haven’t valued ideas.
If we want it to be about ideas then we need to show that. We need to demand that. In the mean time, to attack someone for stating the obvious is just silly. Because when you point a finger, there's always three pointing back at you.
Things that make you go hmm...
I travel fairly often for work, and so I’ve had to deal with and get used to the increasingly onerous adn tedious security precautions that have become part of modern air travel.
After customs pre-clearance it’s off to security screening. While waiting in line I take off my coat and ensure I’ve no coins in my pockets. I take my laptop out of my bag because it needs to be x-rayed separately. And I take off my shoes and carry them, as they need to be x-rayed too. It’s quite a bit to juggle. And if they’re in a really bad mood, it’s off with the belt too. Try dragging all that stuff out of the screening area while holding your pants up at the same time. Fun stuff.
Then they added the liquids thing. No liquids on the plane. Since most of my trips are only a few nights I would never check my bag. Now, if I want to bring shaving cream and tooth paste, I need to. No more just walking off the plane on the other end.
While I’ve thought the liquid thing goes too far, I’m generally in favour of security and I’m always very cooperative with security officials. After all, as a traveler I want things to be safe. It wasn’t until reading Salon’s Ask a Pilot column though that the sheer silliness of this new screening regime occurred to me. Here’ how he put it:
Logic would dictate this material needs to be carefully removed and destroyed. After all, it's potentially hazardous. If you're taking somebody's shaving cream, the presumption has to be that perhaps it's not shaving cream after all, but instead something dangerous. Otherwise, why is it prohibited? And some of those liquid bombs we've been hearing so much about are concocted from highly unstable chemicals, meaning they need to be handled very carefully.
So what happens to this stuff? Does the bomb squad come in every evening and cart it away in steel casks? Don't be ridiculous. It's hurled into the trash. The line of reasoning goes like this: We already know these items are harmless, but we're going to take them anyway. Later, after you leave, we will dump them down the drain.
Are you feeling safer?
He’s exactly right. If this stuff cannot be brought on board because it is a potential explosive, shouldn’t it be disposed of under the impression that it is? Or is this all just a giant, expensive exercise in futility designed to make us feel safe? Or indeed, to keep us a little frightened, and on edge? As I said, things that make you go hmm…
Friday, September 22, 2006
Access for sale! Access for sale!
Having trouble getting the attention of Canada's New Government? Can't afford to hire one of the many former Conservative staffers turned lobbyists? Well, if you've got $125, you're in luck.
Sean Holman at Public Eye Online reports the Conservative riding association in Langley is offering local businesspeople access to International Trade Minister David Emerson and Langley MP Mark Warawa for the low, low price of $125/head.
What do you get for your money (tax deductible, surely?-ed)? In addition to a buffet dinner and the chance to meet Emerson, local business owners will also be able to set-up a display table to advertise their business.
It's all part of a Conservative fundraiser called Langley Expo 2006: A Langley Trade Showcase.
Given the very strict rules around fundraising and cabinet ministers that are now part of the fundraising laws, I'd be very interested in learning how this very interesting, and shameless, event passes the scrutiny. Perhaos some of David's contituents who have been wanting to their MIA MP about his turncoat routine can pool their pennies so one of them can attend.
Here's the invite via Public Eye, who has much more on the story:
-------------------------------
The Langley Conservative Party of Canada Electoral District Association invites you to be a part of
Langley Expo 2006
A Langley trade showcase
Langley Expo will feature an "All Things Langley" display of local products for Minister of International Trade and the 2010 Olympics, the Honourable David Emerson, as well as an exotic buffet dinner featuring food produced in Langley, including ostrich, chicken, salmon, pork tenderloin and wine! Join the fun and see the Langley featured exhibits, as well as door prizes, 50/50 draw, raffles and entertainment!
Don't miss out on your exclusive opportunity to showcase your company's products or services with the Trade Minister! You will also receive valuable information on how to make your business profit from the 2010 Olympic event. Book your table now!
Saturday, October 7th, 2006
at the Coast Hotel and Convention Centre
20393 Fraser Highway, Langley, BC
6PM - 11 PM Cocktails and Reception at 6 PM (No Host bar)
Featured Speakers: Hon. David Emerson, Minister of International Trade, Minister for the Pacific Gateway and the 2010 Olympics.
MP Mark Warawa, Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Environment
Tickets $125
***
Langley Conservative EDA Dinner with MPs David Emerson and Mark Warawa
On October 7, 2006, the Langley EDA of the Conservative Party of Canada is hosting a fundraising dinner at the Coast Casino Hotel in Langley from 6:00 to 11:00 pm. Our guest speaker is Honourable David Emerson, Canada's Minister for International Trade and the 2010 Olympics. You are cordially invited to attend.
This is a tremendous opportunity for you as a Langley business person to meet David Emerson and his staff, discover new business opportunities, make new business contacts, and show what Langley has to offer the rest of Canada and the world. Because we are inviting participating business owners to set up displays, it is also a tremendous opportunity to promote your business and to see what other businesses in Langley have to offer, and to find out how your business can benefit from the 2010 Olympic Games. Langley business leaders have been waiting for this opportunity.
The theme of the dinner is "LANGLEY EXPO 2006". The menu will feature "ALL THINGS LANGLEY", that is, foods and beverages grown, raised or brewed right here in Langley (did you know there was a brewery and an ostrich farm here?). There will be displays form various businesses in Langley and lots of door prizes and surprises. We will also be hosting a VIP reception for invited guests to get "up close and personal" with the Minister, his staff, Langley MP Mark Warawa, other MPs, and local provincial and municipal politicians.
The cost per ticket is $125 per person. To purchase a ticket, contact Ryan Warawa at bcconservative@gmail.com or 604-831-7309.
-------------------------------
Thursday, September 21, 2006
Oh Aaron, why do you hurt me so?
Back in Toronto and catching-up on a week’s worth of season and series premiers on my pvr. Just finished watching the show I’ve been most looking forward to: Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip.
The West Wing was my favourite show on television, and I also loved Sports Night, A Few Good Men, The American President…needless to say, I’m a big Aaron Sorkin fan, so I was really anticipating this one.
As a BCer (albeit one in Toronto) I have to take umbrage at this exchange from the premiere though, between the characters of Matthew Perry and Bradley Whitford:
Perry: So we’ll make some budget cuts. We’ll shoot in Vancouver.
Whitford: We’re not shooting in Vancouver. I’m drawing the line on the insanity. Vancouver doesn’t look like anything. It doesn’t even look like Vancouver. It looks like Boston, California. You need to go to another director…
Oh Aaron, why do you hurt me so? But seriously, Vancouver-bashing aside it was a great show. I’ll miss the politics of The West Wing, but I’m so glad the smart, witty, rapid-fire writing of Aaron Sorkin is back on television. It looks like a great cast too. Bradley Whitford is great, and while I wasn’t a big Friends guy Matthew Perry was great on his West Wing guest shots. Timothy Busfield is great too.
It being a Sorkin project though, I wonder how long it will be before Joshua Malina shows up…
Anyway, speaking of TV, will someone in Hollywood please sign Hugo Chavez to a development deal? Get this guy a show!
I'm on orange alert
I'm on the laptop waiting in the departure lounge of the Orlando Airport for my Air Canada flight back to Toronto, and I'm 40 per cent for alert then usual.
As I'm reminded every five minutes by the PA, the Department of Homeland Security has raised the alert level in the United States to Orange, or High. That's the second highest level of alert, one below Red, or Severe. An Orange Alert means A High Risk of Terrorist Attacks.
Here's what the DHS recommends right now, from their Web site:
All Americans, including those traveling in the transportation systems, should continue to be vigilant, take notice of their surroundings, and report suspicions items or activities to local authorities immediately. Everybody should establish an emergency preparedness kit as well as a communications plan for themselves and their family, and stay informed about what to do during an emergency situation.
I don't have an emergency kit. In fact, I just finished the last of my Cherry Diet Coke so as to not bring any liquids onboard my flight. I am keeping my eyes open though, and after a careful scan of the lounge I don't see anyone suspicious looking. I didn't shave this morning though, so hopefully no one has any doubts about me.
Perhaps it's this high level of alertness that has me calling BS on this Bob Rae donations non-story. Who gives a crap? So the guy gave a few hundred bucks to some old colleagues. Can't a guy give a little help to his friends? If a friend of mine ran for, shudder, the Conservatives I'd drop them a donation, although probably not my vote. I have a lot of other much better policy reasons not to vote for Bob, this story is just silly.
Again, I say, back to the issues please. I'm really getting tired of this marathon leadership race. As it goes on, there seems to be more and more of these stupid non-stories attempting to smear different candidates. Is it December yet?
I see in the Globe Canada's PM is also down in the U.S., and yesterday was talking tough in New York on the identity card issue and the Arctic, pledging to strongly defend Canadian interests. I've had enough of Paul Martin trying to score domestic political points by attacking the Americans, and to do it in New York is just not respectful. Oh, wait, the PM was Stephen Harper. Sorry, my bad.
Well, we're boarding our lovely Embraer plane soon (it kicks Bombardier's ass I'm sorry to say). I leave with this question. On my car to the airport at an ungodly hour this morning the radio played a song, and one of the lyrics was "I'm proud to be an American, where at least I know I'm free." As Canadians then, I wonder, are we:
a) Free, but we don't know it?
b) Not free, but we don't know it?
c) Not free, and we do know it?
d) extremely polite hockey fans?
Something to ponder.
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
It rains in Orlando! Lobbyists, evacuations and endorsements
It’s my last day in Orlando, I fly back to the T-Dot tomorrow morning after the closing party tonight at Disney-MGM Studios. These parties are one of the highlights of coming to Orlando (which doesn’t have much to recommend it as a conference destination otherwise IMO), where a corporation rents out the park for the evening just for the conference goers. It means lots of complimentary food and drink and, best of all, no line-ups for the rides. Much fun.
Just came from an interesting session by Lowblaw (the corporate parent of Loblaw’s) on forecasting. Did you know there are three peak seasons for icing sugar? Indeed. Seriously thouugh, it was interesting. Anyway, I'm staying at a Disney hotel, and I must say it’s not as tacky as I’ve feared. I’d pictured Mickey Mouse everywhere and speakers blaring “It’s a small world after all” 24/7. The architecture is still a little wacky though, and the fountains make for interesting photo
subjects.
And back in Canada, it seems the more things change, the more they stay the same. The Cons continue to value practicality over principle, and the Liberal leadership maneuvering continues to get more frantic.
The oil patch loves Conservative staffers: The Vancouver Sun reprints a Montreal Gazette story from earlier in the week that illustrates further how Steve Harper’s anti-lobbying promises were all bluster. It seems the oil patch is scooping-up recently departed Conservative staffers to lobby their former bosses on the evils of Kyoto, the non-existence of climate change and so on. It seems 30 former Conservative staffers turned lobbyists have secured 327 contracts to lobby the government since they took power. They managed to escape the iron trench coat of Harper’s anti-lobbying laws by jumping to lobbying just before he was sworn in. So it’s all good, right guys?
And YOU paid for it!: News today that the cost of evacuating appx. 15,000 CANADIAN CITIZENS from Lebanon during the conflict with Israel cost the government $85 million. And of course, at the comments section for the Globe story (and I’m sure at Blogging Whories too, haven’t checked) the Rabid Right is up in arms. I’m not sure where I’d end up in the new citizenship system these people would like to see. I was born in Canada but my father emigrated to Canada as a child, so would I qualify as a first class Canadian, or some lower grade? Would the fact he came from an Anglo-Saxon country (Ireland) impact my ranking? A Canadian is a Canadian, try to change that and they’ll get a fight. While the crazies will rant, I really doubt Steve-o is dumb enough to go there.
The limits of endorsements: Two candidates have dropped out of the race so far, and both have supported Bob Rae. Undeniably a win for Bob, who needs to establish his Liberal bonifides.
For all the attention we pay to these moves though, it’s clear grains of salt are needed. Maurizio Bevilacqua’s supporters have scattered among many candidates, including Michael Ignatieff, Gerard Kennedy and Stephane Dion. Jason Cherniak reported yesterday that William Spotton, Maurizio’s former Ontario director, has joined the Dion team. Dido for Carolyn Bennett. Sean Holman also reported yesterday that Caprice Barbour, formerly Carolyn’s B.C. campaign coordinator, has joined the Dryden camp.
I think the lesson to take here is that supporters base their decisions on whom to support, when their chosen candidate drops out, for different reasons than the candidate does. Also, candidate coattails are very limited, if there’s not a philosophical fit. While a candidate may drop-out to endorse another based on promises of cabinet spots, for example, followers look more philosophically.
So, while Maurizio might have seen better personal political fortune with Bob, a supporter attracted to Maurizio for his fiscal proposals might not follow him if he doesn’t see that in Bob, or sees it represented better in another of the candidates. It depends on what attracted the supporter to the candidate in the first place.
My point is this: the race is wide open and fluid, and while candidate endorsements are important the factors that will determine where their delegate support goes are far more policy/philosophy based then cult of personality based.
An interesting exercise, if I had the time, would be to rank the candidates on different policy and philosophy areas (ie. fiscal policy, social policy, foreign policy) and group the candidates on like mindedness, and then factor in their expected delegate support. That would seem to be a more likely indicator of where delegate are likely to go when their candidates drop-out, regardless of whom their candidates endorse.
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Around the Web
As mentioned earlier, I’m down in sunny Orlando for a conference. Not much time for in-depth blogging, but in-between conference sessions (Hudson’s Bay Co. is about to talk about how they’re using data warehousing to prevent fraud) and dips in the Dolphin and Swan’s pools (including trips down the water slide, such fun) I’ve been trying to keep up to date in happenings back in the True North Strong and Free.
Here’s a few stories that have caught my eye:
Conservatives crippling the justice system: A story in the Globe today indicates the Conservatives are letting scores of appointments to the judiciary, the National Parole Board and the Immigration and Refugee Board go vacant, grinding these needed systems to a halt. Here’s the money quote from an unnamed veteran federal tribunal member: “They are in the process of slowly paralyzing the system of justice in the country.” During the election they promised to depoliticize the appointments process, but that was proven to be a hollow promise when he tried to make a Conservative fundraiser as his appointments czar.. Is he perhaps having a hard time finding qualified Conservatives to fill these appointments?
Pushing the Cons on leaky condos: Via the Vancouver Sun comes word a group representing B.C.’s leaky condo owners is giving the Conservative government until Sept. 30 to clarify its position around the issue of a review of the issue. You’ll recall during the campaign Harper promised a review, and hinted at federal compensation, but once his government was sworn in their story changed. Minister Diane Finley says because of (years old) legal challenges there can be no review and they can’t comment further. However, Con MP John Cummins hasn’t gotten the new song sheet, he told constituents the review is still on.
The firings will continue until morale improves: Via Harper Bizarro comes a shocking story in the Victoria Times Colonist. It seems Conservative cabinet lightweight (and Natural Resources Minister) Gary Lunn has fired a civil servant, a scientist no less, because the fellow refused to refer to “Canada’s New Government” instead of the “Government of Canada.” As the scientist said, “We’re not here to mouth political slogans.” That truth was enough to lose him his job. The dismissal is being appealed. Perhaps the politicization replaced wait times among the five priorities?
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Weekend musings
Bennett to Rae: Surprising, and undeniably a big win for Bob. It certainly has to give him the appearance of momentum, as both candidates to drop out of the race have now come to his camp. Momentum aside, as with Maurizio the real question is how many of her supporters will follow her to Rae, as many of his scattered among different camps. Ideologically here again, it doesn’t seem like a natural fit. I like Carolyn, and I really like what she has had to say about reforming the party, listening to the grassroots, and so on. And Bob, smart and talented guy that he is, hasn’t struck me as particularly in touch with the grassroots, shall we say. It’s not to diss Carolyn or Maurizio, or Bob, but I think they have most likely put ideology aside and evaluated Rae as the candidate most likely to win. That’s their choice, and their right. Needless to say I don’t share that evaluation, but I think it’s more important to support the best candidate, not necessarily the most electable one. Interesting times ahead.
Putting myths to rest: More evidence, if it was ever needed, that the myth of Stephen Dion being unelectable in his own province of Quebec is just that, a myth. According to last week’s survey data from the Gandalf Group, while his profile is low in the rest of the country (something that would change quickly, and could be moulded, as the leader) in Quebec, where they know him best, only 38 per cent of voters are likely not to vote for him as Liberal leader, meaning his negatives are in line with the other candidates. Moreover, 31 per cent of Quebecers said they would vote for Dion as Liberal leader. Given that the LPC is only polling at 20 per cent in Quebec, that’s an impressive number that has to give the BQ pause, and the Cons, pause in Quebec. Here’s what David Herle told Don Newman on Politics on Thursday, and it echoes what I’ve been saying on this topic for months now:
Don: Stephane Dion… some say his English isn't all that good and that he's a bit like Mr. Rae in Ontario.
Herle: Turns out not really to be true. There's a group of people in Quebec that really dislike Mr. Dion but they happen to be Bloc supporters and separatists. People that wouldn't vote for the Liberal Party in any event.
He has the strongest following in Quebec of any of the candidates. He's the number one choice of Quebecers to be leader of the Liberal Party.
And 31% of Quebecers say that they're certain or likely to vote liberal if he is the leader. For a party I showed at 20% that's a number you have to where and take seriously.
Brains and the lying liars: With the obvious news that you don’t need brains to be a Conservative candidate, and another admission that the CPC offered $50,000 to an undesirable candidate to drop out of a nomination race, I take this opportunity again to remind that Stephen Harper lied about this, scant months ago, to the Canadian people during an election campaign and has yet to offer an explanation for why.
Programming note: I’m in sunny and warm Orlando right now (it’s a sunny 24c right now, with a forecast high of 33c today) for a conference until Thursday, so light blogging ahead.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Beauty and the Beast?
Maybe someone was upset at all the Peter McKay and Condoleezza Rice budding romance stories that have been all over the media these past few days. But tonight, the Toronto CTV affiliate ran an item on a rumored romantic connection between Peter’s ex, Belinda Stronach, and Toronto Maple Leafs tough-guy Tie Domi.
Apparently, the two have been spotted getting their grove on together at a concert, and sharing a table with Brad Pitt at a recent Toronto International Film Festival-related party. No reports of public canoodling, but CTV reported Domi has told his friends "and associates" that he and Stronach are “dating.”
It’s not clear he ran that story past Stronach though, or maybe she’s just playing coy, but when a CTV reporter caught up with Stronach to ask her about the rumours, she strongly denied she and Domi were anything more than “just friends.” Ouch, Tie. Maybe he was hoping for more, but it looks like Domi as a one-way ticket for Friendsville.
Anyway, Stronach and Domi? I don’t think Peter will be losing any sleep over that one.
And thus ends my gossip column for today.
Cons break leaky condo crisis
* The headline should be Cons break leaky condo crisis promise. If I edit the headline it will screw up the aggregators.
If you haven't lived in B.C.'s Lower Mainland you might not have heard of the province's leaky condo crisis. But trust me when I say in Vancouver, in Victoria, and elsewhere in the province, it's a big deal.
And it was a big deal during the last election campaign, when Stephen Harper promised during a campaign stop in Victoria to conduct a review into the role the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corp. (CMHC), a federal agency, played in the affair and any potential culpability the government might share in the $1.5 billion affair. He even dangled the promise of compensation to entice voters.
Now that they're in government though, chalk that up as another Conservative broken promise. According to the Vancouver Sun, because of court actions filed against the CMHC, Human Resources minister Diane Finley says there won't be a review for now, and she can't comment "while these matters are before the courts."
Sounds reasonable enough. I mean, the courts are the courts, after all. But just one small thing. The court actions were ALREADY UNDERWAY when Harper made his election promise. So the Conservatives promised a review to the people of B.C., knowing full well because of pending court cases it couldn't actually happen.
But as I've written previously the Harper Conservatives are willing to say anything, dishonest, misleading or otherwise, to gain a few more votes. Accountability indeed.
A review of the CMHC's role and culpability has been shelved
Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun
Published: Thursday, September 14, 2006
The Conservative government has shelved its election promise to conduct a review into a federal agency's role and potential culpability in B.C.'s $1.5-billion leaky condo crisis, according to a letter sent by Human Resources Minister Diane Finley to a homeowners' group.
(more)
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Canadiens to retire Ken Dryden's #
Word today that the Montreal Canadiens plan to retire Ken Dryden's jersey #29 to the rafters of the Bell Centre this coming season. Nice news to have for your candidate a few weeks before delegate selection, n'est pas?
Now, if Mark et al could only get the Habs to schedule the ceremony for just before the leadership convention, which is also, convieniently, in Montreal. Maybe the Saturday HNIC game, Nov. 25, against the Flyers? (Which reminds me, screw you Bobby Clarke!) That would be nice timing!
In other news, I hear that the Universite de Montreal has chosen this semester to retire Professor Stephane Dion's tweed jacket with leather shoulder patches to the rafters of the faculty club.
But seriously, congrats to Ken. :)
P.S. But if he thinks this will make us forget Yankee-Burgergate, he should think again!
Do as I say, not as I do, or NDP logic
It seems that in Ontario, according to the NDP, a vote for the Green Party is a vote for the McGuinty Liberals.
Federally, however, a vote for the NDP is most assuredly NOT a vote for the Harper Conservatives. And how dare you even suggest such a thing! Vote strategically? That's a Liberal scam! How pretentious! Why I never…Buzz off, I say!
UPDATE: To the commentors who said the federal and provincial NDP are completly seperate, just like the federal and provincial Liberals; well, you're half right. The Liberals are different, but the NDP aren't.
In Ontario, it's generally the same people for both parties at both levels. In B.C., the Dippers are the same but the B.C. Liberals are much more Conservative, drawing both Liberals and some Conservatives. Many progressive Federal Liberals have voted NDP provincially in B.C., myself included.
Here's the difference though. There is no link between the Liberal Party of Canada and any provincial Liberal party. Same people in some cases, not in others. You need to join the parties separately. However, there IS a direct link between the NDP and its provincial cousins. When you join the Layton's NDP, you also automatically become a member of Howard's Ontario NDP or Carole's B.C. NDP, etc. From the membership form on the federal NDP Web site:
Sign the declaration
I, the undersigned, hereby apply for membership in the New
Democratic Party of Canada and the NDP in the province/territory
of my residence where applicable. I promise to abide by the
Constitution, policies and principles of the NDP both federally and
provincially/territorially. I hereby state that I am not a member
nor supporter of any other federal political party, nor a member or
supporter of any other provincial or territorial party where there is
a provincial or territorial NDP.
So, as you see, the link is tighter with the NDP then it is with any other party. Well, I don't know about the Greens.
Of course, during the 2004 federal election that didn't stop the NDP candidate from telling voters in my riding to vote NDP to stop Gordon Campbell, or NDP activisits in Ontario from telling voters to vote NDP to punish Dalton McGuinty for the health care premiums.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Pat Martin breaks with Layton on Afghanistan
What was that Jack Layton and the left was saying about the Liberals being divided on Afghanistan? The Hill Times is reporting that another of his MPs, Pat Martin, has broken ranks with Layton and and come out against an immediate withdrawl of Canada's troops from Afghanistan. Another NDP MP, Peter Stoffer, was already on the record against immediate withdrawl.
Said Martin:
"I'm more of a Manitoba New Democrat point of view, which [is that] we don't support the idea of the immediate withdrawal of troops. The Taliban train Al-Qaeda to bomb North America and this has been the reason for the international community to try and stop the Taliban. Therefore, it's a good reason for Canada to be part of that initiative," said Mr. Martin, referring to Manitoba Premier Gary Doer's comments also on the weekend to CTV NewsNet that, "The Taliban that we're fighting basically protected the terrorists that were involved five years ago in the 9-11 attack-which included the killing of innocent victims from Manitoba-and so I don't like any anti-military talk."
Perhaps there are a few rays of sanity within the NDP. How long will it be, though, before they're devoured by the ideologues?
Strolling
What is with the trend towards these huge strollers? Seriously, this is getting out of control. I really don't think we're that far from strollers with a built-in six-pack cooler and boombox, not to mention WiFi access so you can check your e-mail.
But hey, if you want a huge, tricked out stroller then power to you. Free market, power to the people, yada yada. I just ask, as a person that squeezes onto a transit bus twice a day, if you're a regular transit user (particularly during peak hours) and a stroller owner wouldn't it make sense to go with a slightly slimmer, smaller model of stroller, and not a huge monstrosity that blocks the aisle and takes up the space of five people?
Just wondering. And so ends my rant for today.
Monday, September 11, 2006
Catching up
Trying to get back into the swing of things, and catch up on some of the things I’ve missed.
Mair for Dion: BC talk radio king Rafe Mair endorses Stephane Dion in a roundabout, half-hearted, kinda sorta way. And he still won't vote Liberal. Said Rafe:
If the Liberals win, I hope Dion is at the helm. For slim though the odds are that either of the major parties will care about our part of the environment, with Dion, while it’s a long, long shot, at least there is that distant ray of hope.
The debates: Didn’t watch them. Truth be told, I watched the first ones (where were they, Winnipeg maybe?) but none since. Wake me when they’re over, I say. I will likely, though, try to go in person to the one in Toronto, if I’m in town. Instead, I went to see Hollywoodland, about the death of Superman actor George Reeves. Wasn’t keen on the ending, but a good movie otherwise.
Senate reform: Putting aside Steve Harper’s “do you have the gonads” routine over holding up his (lacking)accountability act in the Senate, I say once again that piecemeal Senate reform is very, very bad for the country, particularly for the peps Steve is supposed to represent in Western Canada. Speaking of the Senate and gonads though Steve, why doesn’t your unelected, unaccountable Senator and Minister Michael Fortier have the gonads to run in this by-election, and why don’t you have the gonads to make him?
Pourquoi Michael?: I understand Michael Ignatieff wants to reopen the constitution to get Quebec to sign. I’d like to ask him pourquoi? What is the compelling need to reopen the constitutional quagmire? I have no problem with doing things that are difficult, I just want there to be a good reason that makes it worthwhile. What will doing this change in Quebec? Who in Quebec is this a priority for? What does he propose giving Quebec? How’s the rest of the country going to like that? What’s in it for British Columbia? What if Jean Charest doesn’t win the next election and the PQ gets elected, will he negotiate with them? Is the status quo perfect? No, but if it ain’t broke, why go screwing with it? There’s no appetite in the rest of Canada for this, and no support for concessions to Quebec. The country has no desire for another Meech or Charlottetown. The people told the media and political elite where to go on that last one, it’d be wise to heed their advice. Focus instead on the real priorities of all Canadians: a healthy economy, healthy bodies, healthy minds and happy kids.
P.S. There is no fiscal imbalance. While they’re loathe to admit it even the Conservatives now agree with that. Playing footsie with soft nationalists isn’t the right strategy for us, just ask Jean Lapierre how it worked out for us in 04 and 06.
P.P.S. I admit I'm no constitutional scholar. Or any other kind of a scholar. Except a gentleman and a scholar. But can't we just grab the constitution from the archives and hand Charest a Bic? No fuss, no muss, they've signed. The Pizza Hut will be on me: a pan crust Canadian of course, mmm. BYOB.
Ground control to Major Jack: With the possible exceptions of Peter Stoffer and Judy Wasylycia-Leis (probably my favourite parliamentary surname) it becomes increasingly clear that, as much as they dream otherwise, these guys are just not ready for prime time. Putting aside the Israel be nicer to terrorists resolution, look at the Afghanistan one. Even Layton’s attempt at moderation last week is rejected by the fanatics: screw February, send Stephen’s Airbus One over to Kabul right now, they say! Jack slams the government for not having a plan, or communicating it well. OK, fair enough. But what does the NDP propose, besides an immediate withdrawal? How does he propose democracy be nourished in Afghanistan, and the Taliban stopped from blowing everything up? Or does he just prefer we take the isolationist route, and leave the Afghans to their own devices, and the girls from their schools? Leadership means proposing alternatives Jack. As much as he rails against kneejerk pro-Americanism, kneejerk anti-Americanism is just as tiring.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Back from the Big Apple
I’m back in Toronto after a work trip to New York, my first time in the Big Apple. What a great city, I can’t wait to go back.
The vendor that brought us down took us to the U.S. Open Quarter Finals tennis matches on Wednesday, and we got to see two great matches. I’m not a big tennis fan, but it was still fun. In the Women’s game Maria Sharapova got a good challenge from Tatiana Golovin. While Maria won in straight sets she needed a tiebreaker in each, and a lot of very loud grunting, winning 7-6, 7-6. The men’s game was Andy Roddick and Lleyton Hewitt. We couldn’t stay for all of the men’s match but Roddick had things well in hand, going on to win 6-3, 7-5, 6-4.
After a day of business I arranged my flight home the next evening so I had the day to be a tourist. The Ed Sullivan Theater, home of the Late Show with David Letterman, was a block from my hotel so I stopped there for a look. And at the Hello Deli, even saw Rupert Jee working the counter.
Then I walked down to Rockefeller Center to do the NBC Studio Tour. It was pretty neat. We saw the studio for some syndicated Dr. Phil knockoff starting soon and the NBC Nightly News. And, more interestingly, the studio for Saturday Night Live. That was cool. Unfortunately no photos were allowed on the tour, but I was surprised at how tiny it is. Interesting story from the tour: the balcony seats in Studio 8H are yellow stadium seats from Yankee Stadium. When SNL producer Lorne Michaels started the show he was on a tight budget and needed cheap seats, so he asked his buddy, Yankees owner George Steinbrenner, for some seats from Yankee Stadium, which was being renovated. George said sure, but I want the seats back once your little show is cancelled. Needless to say, he’s still waiting.
After NBC I walked downtown, and after stopping for lunch along the way I joined the long like to go to the top of the Empire State Building. It’s a long wait, and while you wait they really push you to spend the extra $6 for the audio tour. If it’s your first time in NY though it’s totally worth it. There’s a lot of interesting facts and sights the tour points out. (For example, in the photo here there’s a green fenced in area visible on the water. Today it’s a driving range, but that’s where the Titanic was to have docked.) And the view is just amazing. It’s amazing how densely populated the city is. Next time, I’d like to go up to the observation deck at night.
Descending back down to the street I walked down to Madison Square Garden, and got on a subway to go downtown to ground zero. First I came by a memorial with the names of the fallen emergency workers, and with the 5th anniversary of the 911 attacks there was quite a few media around. Including a crew from CBC Newsworld, I recognized the reporter but couldn’t remember her name.
Coming from the south end of the site, I came up to the ground zero site, a fenced off hole in the ground with lots of construction activity happening around it. It’s hard to believe that after five years so little has happened, but I understand that’s quite a political quagmire. Never having been to NY I had never seen the twin towers so I can’t picture them standing on the site, but imaging them was sobering. As was imaging them coming down, and the people fleeing for their lives from the falling debris down the very same streets I walked.
After walking up the east side of the site I got back on the subway. My goal was to make it to the 72nd Street station at Central Park, to see The Dakota and Strawberry Fields, site of the memorial to John Lennon. I kept getting on the wrong train though, and my time growing short I headed back to my hotel for a drink before heading off to the airport.
There’s so much more I’d like to do in NY, hopefully I’ll get the chance to go back soon. The week after next I’m off to Orlando for a conference. Not quite as exciting, but maybe a brief trip to Disney World will be possible. In the meantime, back to politics.
P.S. I’ve created a Flickr account where I’ll be posting photos of my travels. I’ve uploaded my NY pics, if interested you can access them on the sidebar.
Thursday, September 07, 2006
I believe the children are our future
When I blogged on the Liberal Party’s Red Ribbon renewal report I wrote that, while some of the structural changes proposed in the report are useful, what is really needed in the Liberal Party of Canada is a cultural change. An attitude change. How do we make that happen? It will take a generation, but I believe it must start with the youth.
The reason politics is done the way its done in the LPC today, this valuing of power over principle and policy, is because that’s how the senior people in the party learned how to do it. Throughout their experience in the party they’ve known nothing else. It’s a learned behaviour, and where did they learn it? In the LPC’s training ground, the Young Liberals of Canada.
Now I don’t mean this to be a condemnation of the YLC. They’re following the model set by their mentors in the senior party. It becomes a continually regenerating cycle of rat fu*kery. But those that are creating paper campus clubs today will be going on to rig nomination meetings or stage hostile riding takeovers tomorrow.
It’s the wrong model. We need a new one. And that’s how we can make the cultural change that’s needed in the LPC happen. It will be hard to teach the old dogs new tricks, but if we start with reforms and a new attitude in the youth wing then we’ll have a new generation of activists that will be ready to do politics differently when they graduate into positions of leadership in the LPC.
A set of recommendations (links to a word doc via TDH) for reforming the Young Liberals BC wing by the YLC(BC)’s outgoing director, Ozren Jungic, has been circulating this week. I don’t know Ozren, but reading his report it seems like he gets it. Either that’s a rarity, or those that do get it usually keep their head down so they can get ahead, it’s tough to say.
He makes a number of good points. One, which I’ve made before about executive positions at the LPC level, is that we need to a closer look at why people are running for executive positions, and if they are truly committed to rolling up the sleeves and doing their work and building the party. Ozren made the point that too often people have run, or cast their votes, based on leadership affiliations rather than on “the merits, experience or character traits of the candidates.” And he’s exactly right. We saw the same thing happen at the last LPC leadership convention, where Martin delegates that had been planning to support one candidate for president, a person that had been campaigning hard on the ground for years, were pressured, cajoled and even threatened into voting for a more Martinite-friendly candidate that was drafted into the race very late in the game. Party members should not be treated, and should not act, like sheep. Let’s choose the right people for the right jobs based on their merits, not their connections.
Secondly, he also calls for the end of the mass signups of uninterested members, both at the party level and by campus clubs. Again, this is a case of learned behaviour that carries through to the senior party, and we’ve seen how well it works out. Furthermore, he wrote: “as Young Liberals we should refrain from relying on alcohol to sign up members who will vote for either our personal endeavours or any others related to this party.” As he put it, “these practices are immoral, embarrassing, and all too common.”
This is a very good point too. This plying of uninterested students with alcohol to join the party to support a particular candidate is deplorable, and has led to many embarrassing situations for the senior party. But alcohol aside, the key thing there is the bribery of uninterested students to join. We need to sell the party on its merits, and if that means less members then so be it. I’d rather have 50 committed people then 150 that are just there for the booze.
I hope the LPC and YL wings and campus clubs across the country take Ozren’s recommendations to heart. The Young Liberals of Canada are the training ground for our party, these are our future leaders. They are uniquely position to graduate a new generation of political activists, one that does politics differently, and one that can set an example for the LPC to emulate and make that needed culture and attitude change happen
Are there leaders in the youth wing ready to step-up and make this happen, and leaders in the senior party to support them?
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
I'm choking on the greenhouse gasses
I'd planned to write a post for this morning on Young Liberals, party reform, and boozing. Current events though have dictated that I post something on this Dion environmental footnote gate tempest.
A gander at my sidebar will reveal I support Stephane Dion. I still do. However, I hold no position on the campaign. I’m a blogger that has always tried to call it as I see it and be fair to all, and so I shall try to do here. The Dion bashers may accuse me of spin, and the koolaiders may accuse me of unfair attacks. I certainly won’t make any friends. C’est la vie, I won’t be losing any sleep over it.
Anyway, here’s my take on this thing, and it’s twofold. One, while these accusations look bad on the surface on closer examination this is really a non-issue. Two, from a communications perspective the Dion campaign, to use a family-friendly term, screwed the pooch on this one and came off looking like The Clampets, and their performance doesn’t exactly fill me with confidence in their competence, to say the least.
THE COMMUNICATIONS
I’m going to start with communications. First of all, Steve Janke didn’t unearth this. These allegations were being shopped around as early as Friday by someone calling himself “Steve Dion” to a range of bloggers and all the MSM usual suspects. No one bit until Janke did on Monday, cutting and pasting “Steve Dion’s” allegations without attribution into his own “investigative report.” Anyone else find it ironic that he plagiarized someone else’s plagiarism allegations? No footnotes even?
But I digress. I read this tipster’s e-mail Friday evening, and naturally I didn’t like what I read. While I was sure there was likely an innocent explanation, I wanted to hear one. I also wanted the campaign to be aware of the allegations, so they could be ready to quickly respond if and when they surfaced.
So, I forwarded a copy of the e-mail to several senior people on the campaign, including the communications/media chair and the national campaign director. Other than an acknowledgement on receipt from one contact on the campaign Monday, after Janke had “broke” this, I received no reply, and I still haven’t.
It pains me to say so, but this is just unaceptable. And incompetent. Even after Janke’s post Monday, it was 24 hours before there was any kind of response from the Dion campaign, and it was a halfhearted one at that. In the meantime, these allegations were left to fester unchallenged. And when his post went online they had known this was coming for nearly THREE DAYS! Is there any adult supervision over at campaign headquarters?
And just for the record, I’ve still heard nothing from the campaign on this issue.
THE ALLEGATIONS
As I just mentioned I have still heard nothing from the campaign on this so I have no idea what their official spin in this is. I’ll admit, at first read the similarities between the Suzuki report and Dion’s proposal are troubling. But the more I think about it and the more I look at it, the more it’s not so much.
First of all, there should have been some degree of footnoting, or at the very least a big shout-out to Suzuki and Co. in the foreward. Look over the line by line allegations, I won’t reprint them here. But as I see it, they fall into two categories.
The first category are cases where plans for action proposed by the Suzuki report are being adopted as policy proposals that Dion would implement if elected. This is where a shout-out would have been appropriate, as a way of saying ‘hey, we think you’re right, and we’ll do what you suggest, thanks for the idea.’ I’m pretty sure that’s why these reports are written, in the hopes that political parties will adopt their suggestions as policy so the proposals actually get implemented, rather than just collecting dust on a shelf.
The second category are items that fall into the category of facts, such as the estimation that 5800 premature deaths could be associated to air pollution in Ontario in
Proposing to implement the policy proposals of an NGO isn’t plagiarism (but as I said, a shout-out is appropriate) and neither is quoting facts from the same source material. To suggest otherwise is foolish.
That discounts all of “Steve Dion’s” laundry list of accusations but two, and that’s two cases where a sentence is identical, word for word, in both reports. That’s not appropriate, to say the least. It’s wrong. I would like an explanation for that. And one should be provided.
My theory? Some volunteer got lazy/tired, and either inadvertently or without thinking wrote the same sentence/s they had read earlier in the Suzuki report, which as already shown they agreed with and were drawing on to formulate their policy on the topic. Unfortunate? Yes. A really big deal? Hardly. Apologize for the mistake, and move on.
THE FALLOUT
My god, you’d think Dion had personally kidnapped the Lindbergh baby or something with the Webspere fallout. With the exceptions I’ve noted, what is the scandal here? Footnoting and the lack of a proper shout-out?
Were people under the impression that policy is written by a few people sitting around a table ordering takeout and asking themselves ‘hmm, the environment, anyone have any ideas?” No, policy is developed by consultations with stakeholders and by research and reading reports, including from reports from groups like the Suzuki Foundation.
As I said earlier, that’s why these groups exist: to raise awareness of their issues and advocate policy options. We’re not talking about writing an academic paper, we’re talking about developing public policy. Frankly, I’m glad that’s how we’re developing policy, talking to experts and taking their advice, instead of relying on pollsters to find five generic ideas that will poll well.
Which brings me to the blogsphere reaction. Frankly, I’d expect this kind of BS from Conservative Bloggers. But to see so many Liberal bloggers hoping on the lynch mob bandwagon, its disgusting.
Particularly some bloggers that had been calling on people to stick to the issues when they felt their candidates were under attack recently. But I guess all is fair in love and a leadership race right? No need to let the facts get in the way of a good smearing. I also wonder which of the leadership campaigns “Steve Dion” is working for? I know he’s not a Conservative, because he (or she) actually read an environmental report.
But anyway, this lynchmob was pure politics. How many of them actually bothered to examine and consider the allegations in detail before jumping at the chance to attack one of the competitors to their own favoured candidates? I’ll just remind them a) karma’s a bitch, and b) At the end of the day, we are one Liberal party that is going to have to be united at the end of the day.
In the mean time, let's get back to talking about ideas, shall we?
PROGRAMMING NOTE: My time and Internet access will be limited over the rest of the week due a business trip to New York City. Therefore, blogging and commenting may be sporadic in the coming days.
Softwood sellout slams U.S. market shut for value-added manufacturer
We’ve heard lots of talk about how the softwood lumber “agreement” the Harper Conservatives “negotiated” with the U.S. is a sellout, and it is. We’ve heard how the big forest companies have been bullied into surrendering over $1 billion in illegally collected tariffs in extortion to their U.S. bullies, with a good portion of it going into a fund directly controlled in part by the Bush White House, and that’s a travesty. But what we haven’t heard much about is it’s impact on our forest dependant communities, and the small forestry related businesses across Canada. That’s an even sadder story.
The background
Back in March I blogged about the story of Woodland Flooring, an 11-person floor manufacturer in Comox, B.C. Using wood from independent lots that aren’t impacted by stumpage fees, as well as beetle-kill sales and windfall reclamation, owner Steve Roscoe manufacturers wide plank wood floors. Theirs is exactly the kind of business we need to be encouraging in Canada: community owned, environmentally minded, creating jobs in Canada by adding value to our natural resources.
After years of work and investment Roscoe had penetrated the U.S. market, with exports accounting for 30 per cent of his business. A real success story. But then along came Emerson, Harper, and the U.S. government. As I blogged, back in March the Bush White House decided to extend its illegal anti-dumping and countervailing to items that had not previously been covered, and Woodland’s wide plank wood flooring business was suddenly slapped with a duty.
Even though, since their wood comes from independent lots not impacted by the disputed stumpage fees, they shouldn’t have. And to make it doubly worse, the duty was calculated not on the value of the wood they use, but on the value of the product AFTER its processed and manufactured into flooring for sale.
Overnight, their product became 25 per cent more expensive to 30 per cent of their customer base. And the Conservative government elected on a platform of standing up for Canadians? They wouldn’t return his phone calls. I bet Emerson returns Canfor's calls pretty quick.
Today
But now there’s a “deal” in place, so surely, after this period of discomfort, there’s light at the end of the tunnel for Woodland Flooring, right? Wrong. Under the terms of the Harper softwood sellout, the U.S. market is now firmly slammed shut to Roscoe. Here’s what he told the Comox Valley Record recently:
For Steve Roscoe, owner/manager of Comox’s Woodland Flooring Co., it still leaves too much unknown for them to be able to maintain their American business connections.
“We’re a casualty of war here in the softwood lumber dispute,” said Roscoe — whose value-added softwood flooring product is subject to tariffs despite the source of his wood being private lots not qualified for the subsidizing that American lumber producers call unfair. Tariffs for Woodland’s products are also charged on the finished item, not on the raw timber alone that they start off with.
For Roscoe, the biggest problem with the new deal is the use of a quota system — meaning that the export charges (now to be collected by the Canadian government) will largely depend on how much softwood is sent south during a certain time period.
There’s no way of knowing how much duty they will pay until it’s already sent, he said, which means there’s no way to charge for it.
“We don’t know — we can’t tell our customers how much. It could be small, it could be high. It could be triple if the majors (producers) are gluttons,” said Roscoe.
It’s come to a simple solution for them, he added. After working hard advocating for his business — even making contacts with the U.S. Consulate office in Vancouver, whose representatives tried to help — Woodland Flooring has officially had to stop shipping to the States.
“The door’s firmly slammed in our face right now,” he said.
Before Woodland was subject to the 21.24 per cent tariffs, around 30 per cent of his business was for American customers. That’s since dropped to less than 10, he said — and will effectively be zero now that Roscoe anticipates this deal to go through.
…
For Roscoe though, this agreement is a frustrating example of the country’s politicians not sticking up for their own people.
“We’ve made huge concessions and now we have Washington making policy for B.C. forestry — that’s pretty sad.”
So, while Harper had to bully the forest giants into submission at least they’ll be able to do business with the U.S. again. Well, at least until the protectionist American lumber lobby gets a burr in its saddle again, having modernized its plants with our money. But while they’re getting screwed, it’s the little guys that the Conservatives are supposed to be all about fighting for that are getting doubly screwed.
We’re supposed to be encouraging our small businesses to become exporters, but I’ve talked with Roscoe and he says he's done with foreign markets. As he put it, he doesn’t trust our government enough anymore to risk his business on the politicians. He’s been lucky that the loss of the American market has coincided with a building boom in B.C., so he hasn’t had to lay off any employees. From now on, Woodland will be focusing on the Canadian market. They’re done with “free trade.”
“The fact is, we have thrown away 5 years of money , time and energy marketing to our neighbors to the south when we had a rock solid free trade agreement,” said Roscoe in an e-mail. “Both the US and Canada are to blame for our problems. We had no duty applied to our flooring a year ago, it was only implemented at the time of the settlement! What the HELL is going on here???”
That’s a very good question, and I wish I had a very good answer for him. I know Stephen Harper and David Emerson don’t. Could this agreements defenders explain why the U.S. market should be shut to value-added manufacturers like Woodland Flooring?
Vote it down
This isn’t about picking up votes for a majority, or playing confidence games in the house and trying to look decisive. It’s not about politics. It’s about forest dependant communities in British Columbia, in Ontario and in Quebec. It’s not just about forest giants like Canfor. It’s about small, value-added manufacturers like Woodland Flooring.
I ask every Member of Parliament, and especially Stephen Harper and David Emerson, to look themselves in the mirror and, putting politics aside, ask themselves not just if this is the best deal we can get, but if this is the deal the people of Canada deserve. Can they go into communities like Comox and look the people in the eyes?
The evidence is mounting. Mr. Harper, put this deal where it belongs: in the chipper. Then get back to work getting Canadians a fair and honourable deal. This is a difficult issue. It may mean long, costly court challenges. It may mean a nasty trade war. But no one ever said governing was easy. Nothing worth doing ever is.
Monday, September 04, 2006
A softwood primer
Tomorrow I'll have a post on how Stephen Harper's softwood sellout is even worse then you think, with the story of a small value-added manufacturer from the Comox Valley that has seen a once lucrative business to the U.S. evaporate since this trade dispute began. And once this sellout is in place, the U.S. market will be closed to him even more firmly than it is today.
But first, on this last semi-official day of summer I invite you to to view this softwood lumber dispute primer from Rick Mercer of the Mercer Report: Everything You Need To Know About Softwood, But Were Afraid To Ask. With humour and wit, Rick lays out a complicated issue in a way we can all understand.
And understanding it makes Steve's billion dollar surrender all the more disgusting.
Sunday, September 03, 2006
On the radio
If you’ve ever wondered if I speak as incoherently as I write, you’ll have your chance to find out tonight as I make my radio debut.
I’ll be a guest tonight on Sean Holman’s Public Eye Radio show, on CFAX
The segment will be running from 6:00 to 6:30 PST (9:00 to 9:30 EST), and for those not in the Victoria area there is a streaming Internet audio broadcast available.
I’m debating affecting a British accent for the interview, as I find those BBC radio reporters always sound so authoritative and trustworthy. Still undecided on that point though. I do, however, intend to start writing with a British accent.
Saturday, September 02, 2006
Did Stephen Harper lie?
A follow-up to Thursday’s post on Alan Riddell, the former Conservative nomination candidate for Ottawa South that is suing the CPC for the compensation he was promised in exchange for stepping aside in the last election in favour of a star candidate.
You’ll recall that in the linked Canadian Press story, the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) acknowledged they agreed to pay Riddell an unspecified amount of compensation, but claim since he breached an agreement to keep it quiet the deal was now invalid (emphasis mine):
Riddell claims the party agreed to pay him up to $150,000 in campaign expenses and legal fees in return for stepping aside but then reneged on the deal.
Conservatives don't deny they agreed to some sort of financial arrangement with Riddell. But the party claims Riddell breached the deal by going public about it and consequently is owed nothing.
The key thing there is that they acknowledge there was a financial arrangement to pay Riddell for stepping aside.
But here’s what Stephen Harper said last December on the campaign trail, when allegations of a compensation arrangement for Riddell first came to the pubic eye and Harper was asked if what Riddell was claiming was true (emphasis mine) :
But Harper sharply denied the suggestion.
"The party does not have an agreement to pay Mr. Riddell these expenses, and Mr. Riddell has not been paid anything to date," he said, explaining that the party's national council had decided Riddell was not an "acceptable'' candidate.
As we see, last December, while running for election, Harper said there was no deal. Now, however, that legal proceedings are underway against them the CPC admits there actually WAS a deal. I see two possible scenarios here:
1) Harper knew there was a deal and also knew that admitting it would seriously torpedo his plan to campaign on being a new clean and ethical government, just as the election was getting underway, so he lied to the media and the Canadian people, or
2) Harper was kept in the dark about the deal and therefore told the truth as he knew it, which means his staffers and/or party executives hid this damaging information from him and set him up to the microphones in December to unknowingly lie to the Canadian people
Either possibility is quite serious. Either Harper blatantly lied to the Canadian people to win an election, or members of the CPC campaign team/inner circle lied to their leader and made him look a liar and a fool.
One thing is clear though: Stephen Harper and the CPC owe an explanation to the Canadian people.
