*The other day I posted on turncoat minister David Emerson’s $10,000+ flight to Geneva for a World Trade Organization conference, and pondered how on earth he could spend that much on air fare.
I priced out seats in economy (not that his Honour would sully himself in coach) and executive, all of which cost substantially less than what Emerson racked-up. A commenter pointed-out though that I had neglected to price first class fares, which are apparently a step above executive class. I’ve never flown in business, so I can’t imagine what wonders await in First Class.
It’s a class that neither Air Canada or Swiss Air offer, so he didn’t fly with them, but first class is offered by British Airways. And, when priced, a Canada to Geneva via London flight in first class comes to just over $10,000 round trip, more that double the $4000 it would cost to fly business on Air Canada. Maybe the complimentary wine is a better vintage and the beer selection includes imports?
So, that’s a mystery solved. But still, I have to ask: how in the hell can anyone justify a public servant spending over $10,000 of taxpayer dollars for one roundtrip? I mean, you could buy a good used car for that! I’m fine with ministers flying executive, but over $10k for first class! It’s disgusting.
I can’t wait to hear the justifications from my Conservative friends. I suspect it will involve “you did it too” and the use of the word “Liberanos”. If it’s wrong it’s wrong guys, period. Spending nearly a third of my annual salary to fly a minister to Switzerland? I don’t think so.
*Yesterday I mentioned I found it odd that Canada’s New Government(TM) had yet to issue a statement on the execution of Saddam Hussein. As far as I can tell they still haven’t, although there has been some unofficial comment from Foreign Affairs apparently. A commenter points the way to an interesting Macleans.ca piece that offers some insights and illumination. The international treaty/death penalty angle is particularly interesting. It’s not like they didn’t know this was coming though, they’ve had plenty of time to formulate an opinion.
Sunday, December 31, 2006
Following-up previous posts
Saturday, December 30, 2006
That's S-A-D-D-A-M
Does anyone else find it weird that Canada’s new government has yet to comment/issue a statement on the execution of Saddam Hussein? I'm assuming they're in favour and what not, but still. So far there’s been nothing from the PMO, or from Foreign Affairs. Also, I’m not sure whether to be amused or concerned to learn that whomever was answering the phone at Foreign Affairs didn’t know who Saddam Hussein was. Oh, how quickly the world forgets, eh Saddam?
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Weekend reading
*Experts slam fertility board for ignoring other voices: More fallout from the Conservatives’ decision before Christmas to quietly stack the board appointed to oversee Assisted Human Reproduction Canada with ideological loyalists and social conservatives, and apparently NO stem-cell scientists or fertility experts.
*Fly me to the moon: The Canadian Space Agency wants to participate in NASA’s mission to the moon. Given that the Harper Conservatives refused a budget-neutral request to build a Mars rover and have left the CSA leaderless for over a year, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
*Rafe’s predictions: West Coast pundit and radio talk show host Rafe Mair weighs-in with his predictions for 2007. On the federal scene:
In April, Stephane Dion will become Prime Minister of Canada, surprising all the pundits and driving the Conservatives back to their customary practice of eating their young.
Non-separatists in Quebec will support Dion. So will Ontario as long as Bob Rae stays away. B.C. will give him 15 seats. Dion’s lack of charisma will itself be charismatic as he presents himself to voters.
Prime Minister Dion will re-construct Fisheries and Oceans Canada, taking back all its power over salmon, and listening to those who fight to save our fisheries.
Jack Layton will, after the NDP takes a thumping in the April election, resign. God alone knows who might be his replacement. Can the now invisible and eerily silent Svend Robinson be the man?
*2006 in quotes: The Vancouver Sun compiles a fun list of quotes from the year that will soon have been 2006. My favourite:
"If you ask Ken Dryden the time, he'll build you a watch." Former Philadelphia Flyers' GM Bobby Clarke on his long-winded former foe.
And the lowlight, but it reminds us why he’s an asshole and should not be taken seriously by any legitimate news organization as any kind of commenter or pundit:
"I think she's a bitch. I mean it's as simple as that, and I think that 90 per cent of men would probably say she's a bitch for the way she's broken up Tie Domi's home and the way she dumped [Foreign Affairs Minister] Peter MacKay. She is a bitch." Norman Spector talking about Liberal MP Belinda Stronach on CKNW.
*Tories deny Kingsley quit over political donations row: And if you believe them I’ve got a lovely bridge for sale I’m willing to let you have cheap. Serious inquires only, please.
*Critical flaw in Senate plan: One of the Sun’s quotes was from Harper saying with the last election the West is now in. One wonders then why he is set to screw the West with his Senate “reform” plan. As this editorial in the Nanaimo News Bulletin puts it:
But there is a critical flaw in Harper’s announcement – it does nothing to solve western Canada’s long-standing displeasure with the disproportionate nature of the Senate, one of the fundamental reasons behind the call for Senate reform. The four western provinces have 24 Senate seats. Ontario and Quebec have 24 seats each.
Any elections only lend a false air of legitimacy and fairness to a body that utterly fails to represent its largest geographical constituent base – everything west of Ontario. This would reaffirm the West as being largely irrelevant to the rest of Canada.
Friday, December 29, 2006
$10K to fly to Geneva? Did Emerson take the Concord?
Between periods of the Canada/Germany hockey game (GO CANADA GO!) I was browsing through the travel and hospitality expenses of Harper government cabinet ministers and staff. Because that’s what I do for fun.
Anyone can do it, it can make for interesting reading. Just go to any government ministry Web site, and look for the sidebar link “proactive disclosure.” Here you’ll find how much ministers and their staff have spent on travel, hospitality, dinner and other fun stuff. The information must be publically disclosed on the Web thanks to regulations brought-in by the former Liberal government.
I was browsing through the expenses of my favourite minister, turncoat floor-crosser David Emerson, when this entry caught my eyes:
Over $10,000 to fly to Geneva? That's still in Switzerland, right? I mean, I could see if he was flying to Somolia, or Baghdad, but Switzerland? Bless the Internet, I stopped by some travel Web sites to price Ottawa/Geneva roundtrips. Here’s what I found:
*Air Canada (economy) $984.15
*Air Canada (executive) $3973.53
*Continental (economy) $978.98
*British Airways (economy) $2104.84
Not only is Air Canada the cheapest, and a Canadian airline, but David would also earn a nice chunk of Aeroplan points. And even the executive class option is less than half what Emerson expensed. So, how did he rack-up a $10g tab for air fare?
But wait, it gets better. He also brought along his parliamentary secretary, Helena Guergis, who expensed $5187.16 in air fare:
Also along for the Swiss trip was policy advisor Paul Benoit, who was downright frugal by comparison, incurring just $1860.39 in airfare:
If you’ve met David you know he needs a spinner near by at all times, and on this trip that was Robert Klager, his director of communications, at $5218.18 in air fare:
So, there you have it, two MPs and two staffers on a trip to Geneva spending $22,666.58 in air fare alone. That’s an average of $5666.65/person, although the frugal Benoit really skews the numbers down.
I have to ask, did they hire a Zepplin or something? What’s up with that?
But the bill for this trip is actually higher. Because also going to the same Geneva WTO conference was a large contingent from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (air fare in brackets), including Minister Chuck Strahl ($7,226.86), parliamentary secretary David Anderson ($7314.11), parliamentary secretary Jacques Gourde ($6690.03), policy advisor Christine Bakke ($5438.29), communications director Conrad Bellehumeur ($6109.03) and senior policy advisor Christina Patterson ($5298.29). Their filings also included a side trip to Newfoundland. So a six person contingent from this ministry for a total of $38,076.61, or an average of $6346.10/person.
All told, that's a contingent of 10 politicos (five MPs, five political staffers) attending one conference at a cost of $60,743.19 just for air fare, an average of$6074.32. If they'd taken the Air Canada economy option the bill would have been closer to $9841.50 for all ten people, saving the taxpayers some $50,901.69.
And what did they accomplish? Read for yourself:
Agriculture Minister Chuck Strahl said he was disappointed that the issue didn't get off the ground in Geneva.
"There were no negotiations at all, that's the sad part, the sad truth,'' Strahl said Saturday in a teleconference call from the Swiss city.
Trade Minister David Emerson also expressed his dismay.
"While WTO members have worked hard to reach an agreement, the gaps among members' negotiating positions proved to be too great to bridge during this meeting,'' Emerson said in a statement.
Harper's $75,000 Vancouver non-announcement
What does $75,000 of taxpayer dollars get you these days? Apparently a few recycled Stephen Harper platitudes and a lot of hot air.
You’ll recall Harper and his gang flew out to Vancouver in October for what was billed as “a major announcement” on the environment and turned out to be just recycled pabulum with nothing new. Four minister tagged along for the photo-op, and none of them designed to answer any media questions.
And the cost for this pseudo-campaign trip by Harper and a chunk of his cabinet? According to a Vancouver Sun investigation, some $75,000 of your taxpayer dollars. Plus Challenger Jet expenses of $9,174/hour.
Among the expenses was over $13,000 for audio, lighting and teleprompting services at four public events, including a campaign-style speech by Harper to the Canadian-Chinese community, and $203 to another government department to rent 10 Canadian and 10 BC flags. They couldn’t just borrow them? I mean, they’re the same government!
Harper traveled with an pack of seven staff members, Lawrence Cannon took three, and Rona Ambrose and Gary Lunn managed with one each. A frugal Tony (sold that stock yet?) Clement went stag, or maybe he borrowed one of Harper’s seven staffers to carry his bag.
A trip to Vancouver to repeat pledges cost $75,000, documents show
Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun
Published: Friday, December 29, 2006
OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper spent $75,000 on a trip to Vancouver to do nothing but repeat previous pledges, according to internal government documents obtained by The Vancouver Sun.
The money for Harper and his entourage of cabinet ministers and aides was spent on flights, hotels, meals and other travel costs in October for what was billed as a major announcement on the environment, according to the documents.
The Oct. 10 announcement, staged against a brilliant Vancouver skyline with four cabinet ministers in the background, was ridiculed by commentators as being fuzzy and vague because Harper only repeated previous pledges to introduce a Clean Air Act.
(more)
Thursday, December 28, 2006
So-called Giant ice shelf snaps free from Canada's Arctic
More so-called evidence tonight of so-called climate change and so-called global warming. It seems a so-called giant ice shelf snapped free from Canada’s so-called Arctic. That seems so-called concerning to me. I hope Canada's so-called New Government will take some so-called action on this by at least, say, 2050.
STEVE LILLEBUEN
Canadian Press
A giant ice shelf the size of 11,000 football fields has snapped free from Canada's Arctic, leaving a trail of icy boulders floating in its wake.
The mass of ice broke clear from the coast of Ellesmere Island, about
Warwick Vincent of Laval University, who studies Arctic conditions, travelled to the newly formed ice island and couldn't believe what he saw.
“It was extraordinary,” Dr. Vincent said Thursday, adding that in 10 years of working in the region he has never seen such a dramatic loss of sea ice.
“This is a piece of Canadian geography that no longer exists.”
The collapse was so powerful that earthquake monitors
Scientists say it is the largest event of its kind in 30 years and point their fingers at climate change as a major contributing factor.
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Make Rory an All-Star
Want to give the finger to the hockey establishment? Vote online to send Canucks defenceman Rory Fitzpatrick to the all-star game.
I hadn’t heard of this story until the weekend, when Don Cherry went off his rocker again on Coach’s Corner. It has to do with the fan balloting for the NHL All Star Game. The starters are selected by the fans, and one of the ways to vote is online. It seems that on the Internet and the blogsphere a movement has erupted to get Fitzpatrick, a journeymen defenceman, elected a starter for the Western Conference.
It’s something fun, and a way of giving the finger to the hockey establishment that place so much importance in an All Star Game that is one of the biggest jokes in professional sport, and take it all so seriously. It should be noted Fitzpatrick has/had nothing to do with it.
Here’s how the guy behind the “Vote for Rory” Web site that started all this puts it:
"A guy like Rory Fitzpatrick deserves to go to the all-star game over a lot of other guys who probably don't want to be there anyway," Schmid said in an interview. "He showed a lot of determination to stay in the league and make the most out of his role.
"The all-star game is a great way not only to honour the superstars but honour the guys that are the best at their role. "
The people responded to the movement, with Fitzpatrick second in the voting for awhile. He’s now fallen to third with an amazing 486,842 votes. The top two defencemen will start, currently that’s Scott Niedermayer with 540,380 and Nik Lidstron with 522,345.
He fell to third after the hockey establishment reacted to the surprise of him being in second with much assholery and douchebaggery. Don Cherry even personally attacked Fitzpatrick, who as I said had nothing to do with all this, calling him “a joke, a freak and a jerk.”
Then there’s hockey writer/establishment defender Scott Morrison, who arrogantly declares “enough is enough” with all this silliness. Fitzpatrick just isn’t “worthy” and he should do the “honourable thing” and bow out. Not worthy of playing in a meaningless beauty contest held so corporate sponsors can get VIP passes and feel important? Oh, the humanity!
Well, I say we tell Cherry who the real jerk is, and tell Morrison to remove the stick from his posterior. I’m going to be voting for Rory as often as possible, and I hope all of you will as well. It doesn’t take long. Visit here for the instructions or go straight to the ballot here, and just select Fitzpatrick as a write-in candidate for the Western Conference.
And stick it to the man!
Morning reading
- If you've been following the story of Comox-based Woodland Flooring, a small value-added wood flooring manufacturer and how they were getting screwed both by the softwood lumber dispute and by the Conservative-brokered billion-dollar sellout/settlement, you’ll be happy to learn Woodland got some good news just before Christmas.
- Another from the category of the media catching-up with the blogsphere, this time on Steve Harper’s pre-holiday appointment/patronage orgy. As the Globe reports this morning, it appears Harper and his Health Minister, Tony Clement (sold that stock yet Tony?) have stacked the board appointed to oversee Assisted Human Reproduction Canada with social conservatives rather than, you know, fertility experts and stem-cell researchers.
It includes a professor of Jewish studies who has written of his opposition to abortion unless life of the mother is being threatened, a social anthropologist who is director of research for the Catholic Archdiocese of Toronto, a Montreal oncologist who has spoken against euthanasia at an anti-abortion conference, and a Halifax bioethicist who opposes using fresh embryos for stem-cell research -- an opposition commonly voiced by those who believe life begins at conception.
And chaired, of course, by a former Conservative Premier. What, me worry? Also, the Globe’s Brian Laghi has more on how the religious right has Harper’s ear.
- This story form Reuters is actually a few weeks old, but it just ended-up in my local Niagara Falls paper the other day. It details though how the environment and climate change is not only becoming a “so-called” election issue in Canada, but in countries around the world as well as the issue is championed by mainstream parties.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Peter’s Excellent Middle East Adventure
If it is indeed one of Peter McKay’s New Year Resolutions to be more of a diplomat and less of a jerk I applaud him and fully support him in his quest. And it seems our Foreign Affairs Minister would like to start that quest by trying to help bring peace to the Middle East.
Yes, it seems that in the New Year our Peter wants to fly over to the region and see if he can’t get everybody talking.
"I would love to, in some fashion, be able to facilitate a coming together and a discussion," MacKay told CTV in a report broadcast from Ottawa on Sunday, "and that's not to set unreal expectations – but I think we've have to constantly try."
I certainly applaud the enthusiasm, and I think even long shots in the name of peace are worth the effort. Canada should try to be an honest broker. A long shot it will be too, since Peter will have some limits placed on his peacemaking, as talking to Hezbollah and Hamas will be verboten.
"We will not solve the Palestinian-Israeli problem, as difficult as that is, through organizations that advocate violence and advocate wiping Israel off the face of the Earth," Mr. Harper said yesterday in a wide-ranging year-end interview with CTV to be aired Saturday.
"It's unfortunate because with Hamas, and with Hezbollah in Lebanon, it has made it very difficult to have dialogue -- and dialogue is ultimately necessary to have peace in the long term -- but we are not going to sit down with people whose objectives are ultimately genocidal."
I agree with his assessment of the two groups. Hopefully progress can be made through President Mahmoud Abbas. But still, who else can you make peace with but your enemies?
On the plus side, Harper and McKay seem determined to reclaim Canada’s mythical role as an “honest broker” in the world:
Harper says under previous governments, Canada has been “completely absent” in Mideast peace efforts, rather than playing the role as a neutral, honest broker.
Always nice to see the Prime Minister take a gratuitous partisan shot when he’s trying to be a statesmen. Still, whether we were an honest broker before or not, it’s good to see Harper and McKay trying to carve out that role for Canada again.
It’s just too bad his parliamentary secretary, James Moore, isn’t on the same page:
In any case, it is hard to see exactly what even the most honest broker could do in the present situation. The Oslo process is dead…Harper's critics should stop worrying about its mythical status as an honest broker in the Middle East and remember Churchill's dictum about impartiality. Only fools are impartial between the fireman and the fire.
No matter what James says, I wish Stephen and Peter good luck as they try position Canada as an honest broker in the Middle East.
P.S. What happened to Wajid Kahn, I thought this was his thing? Has he filed his report yet?
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Harper violated political contribution rules
CP’s Joan Bryden moves a story on the wire this boxing day revealing that, just before Christmas, the Harper Conservatives quietly admitted it failed to declare hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of donations.
I’ll leave you to read the story for all the details on just how badly the Conservatives screwed-up. It has to do with their handling of delegate fees for their last convention. The Cons say they don’t count as donations, the law says the opposite. Either they were unaware of the rules, misunderstood them or just didn’t care, I don’t know. They still arrogantly insist they were right though, even though the law clearly says otherwise. Don’t they have any lawyers in that party? Isn’t Steve an economist?
Speaking of Steve, here’s an interesting graph from the story:
… the report indicates the Conservative party then discovered three delegates - including Prime Minister Stephen Harper - had exceeded their $5,400 annual limit for political contributions. As a result, the party refunded $456 each to Harper and the other two delegates.
Will there be any consequences for this violation of the rules by Mr. Harper and the Conservative Party? Apparently Elections Canada is expected to come down with a ruling in the New Year. This thing would seem to be far from over.
There’s also more:
... the registration form for the (Conservative)convention invited outside observers - generally lobbyists and representatives of professional groups - to use their corporate credit cards to pay the $750 observer fee.
If true, that would appear to be a violation of the prohibition on corporate donations to political parties, a very big no-no, to say the least. Far from over indeed. I’ll leave the last word to Mark Holland:
Opposition parties say the Conservatives are guilty of either gross ignorance or deliberately flouting the law.
"The reality is it sounds like they broke a lot of laws and they're going to have to be answering for that, no doubt about it," said Liberal MP Mark Holland, who added that the Tories are probably hoping nobody notices their admission over the holidays.
CP gets it right: It's the Canadian soldier
Never mind what Time Canada or Time had to say about the newsmaker of the year, I think the Canadian Press got it right. The Canadian Soldier is definitely Canada’s newsmaker of the year.
'Canadian Soldier' most notable of 2006
Afghan conflict has left military 'on the lips, and in the hearts' of fellow citizens
December 26, 2006
Bill Graveland
CANADIAN PRESS
MAS'UM GHAR, Afghanistan–Standing at an observation post in the heart of Taliban country, Pte. Conrad Craig of Edmonton was in a reflective mood on what it means to be a Canadian soldier.
The 23-year-old member of the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry is keenly aware of the changing status for the Canadian soldier in the eyes of Canadians and the world. Their mission in Afghanistan and the sacrifices they have endured have put Canadian troops at the forefront of public attention.
"I've always been proud to be a Canadian soldier," said Craig, looking through binoculars for possible threats among the orchards near Kandahar city. "Always will be and even if I ever do get out, I'll always be a Canadian soldier."
The men and women of the Canadian Forces have dominated news coverage in 2006 and as such, editors and broadcasters across the country have chosen the Canadian Soldier as Canada's Newsmaker of the Year in the annual poll by The Canadian Press and Broadcast News.
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Sunday, December 24, 2006
The Good German, and some bad Americans and Russians
It being the holidays it seems appropriate to take a break from ripping the Conservatives for a bit (although they’re still really horrible and all that) and talk about other things. Like movies.
Before I caught the train Saturday morning to spend a (painfully green) Christmas with the grandparents, aunts, uncles and assorted others in Fort Erie I went to see The Good German, the latest George Clooney black and white vanity project.
Besides Clooney the movie also includes Tobey McGuire and the always lovely Cate Blanchett, and was directed by Steve Soderbergh. The movie is set in post-WW2 Berlin, during the Potsdam Conference. Clooney is a war correspondent, McGuire his driver and Blanchett is an old Clooney flame and McGuire’s current girlfriend. Needless to say that causes some troubles, as the story plays out in a ruined Berlin around espionage and intrigue as the battle lines of the Cold War begin to film.
Cinematically it’s a very interesting, attractive movie. Shot in black and white, as I mentioned, but also in very much a 1930s/40s style of filmmaking. Many of the cuts and shots, the music and sound effects, and even some of the dialogue are reminiscent of that era. There’s one scene near the end where the Casablanca-like imagery is unmistakable.
I’m still somewhat undecided about the movie. I liked it, but I wouldn’t say it was fantastic. I enjoyed the setting and the intrigue, but beneath it, it’s really a murder/love triangle-type story with the other political stuff seeming secondary/tacked-on. It’ doesn’t have the higher meaning of a Good Night and Good Luck, for example.
The plot isn’t really explained super-well as you go along, you need to pay fairly close attention, and some knowledge of history to add context is helpful too. The writing is also rather hackneyed at times. Maybe they were going for a 30s/40s style there too, but it didn’t work for me.
Overall, though, if you’re a fan of the period it’s worth seeing when its in wider release in the new year. I’ll give it *** ½ out of 5.
P.S. Speaking of movies, Red Tory has an interesting piece on the reinterpretation of some Capra classics.
Saturday, December 23, 2006
On the twelfth day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
12. 12 months of $100 "child care" cheques that don't even come close to covering the cost of child care
11. An arrogant refusal to lower the Parliament Hill flag to half mast when Canadian soldiers die in the line of duty and lies about why they won't
10. A health minister with a 25 per cent stake in a pharmaceutical manufacturer
9. No understanding of what that very important Quebecois nation motion they rammed through the House actually means
8. An e-mail attempting to raise money for the Conservative Party based on Harper's handling of the Lebanon conflict while the bombs were still falling, at a time when Eight Canadians had been killed and thousands more were still waiting for evacuation
7. Silence when interactions were revealed between two senior government members and a listed terrorist group
6. Six months without acting or following-up on the recommendations put forward by the government's wait-times advisor, even though this was one of their five priorities
5. Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
4. Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
3. A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
2. Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
1. And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Friday, December 22, 2006
Nominations and campaigns
Just because it's the holidays…ok, darnit, Christmas…doesn't mean things aren't happening on the campaign and nominations front.
Stephane Dion today appointed Mark Marissen and Nancy Girard as the LPC's national campaign co-chairs. I don't know much about Nancy, save she ran unsuccessfully for the HoC in 2004 and that she's the Regional VP for Quebec. Mark of course ran Dion's leadership campaign and was B.C. campaign co-chair in 2004 and 2006. He did a great job on the leadership campaign and I'm hoping for the same kind of issues-based, principled approach during the election campaign.
Over at Public Eye Online, Sean reports that Donna Cadman, wife of the late great Chuck Cadman of keeping the Martin government alive fame, has won the Conservative nomination in Surrey North. She'll go up against NDP incumbent Penny Priddy, a former provincial cabinet minister. Apparently Donna endorsed Penny in the last campaign, and they're friends. Should be an interesting race.
Speculating
Jonathan over at TDH reports that Hedy Fry has been re-nominated in Vancouver-Centre, but may step aside in favour of Christy Clark, Mark's other half and a former provincial Liberal cabinet minister. He also reports speculation that another former BC Lib cabmin, Gary Collins, may be eyeing Stephen Owen's seat in Vancouver Quadra.
There's also been much speculation of Justin Trudeau seeking a seat somewhere. Possibly Lapierre's old Outremont riding or maybe even Mount Royal if Irwin Cotler hangs them up. There were even rumours of him supplanting Wendy Yuan to run in Vancouver-Kingsway, which was unlikely and has since been disproved.
You know, I'd rather see him run somewhere outside Quebec though. I think he's probably more popular in the ROC. Would need to be somewhere urban, obviously. I don't think he'll play in the rural west or the 905. We already have our hands full in Toronto, and I'd have to think Calgary and Edmonton are out.
So even if it's not Kingsway, if they could fund him a Vancouver riding that'd be interesting. Or, how about Victoria? Urban, swings left, Liberal for years with David Anderson, swung NDP last time. That could be interesting.
Someone else I'd like to see run out West is Gerard Kennedy. He has the Western roots, that was a big part of his campaign, him winning a seat in the West would be huge for the party. An interesting choice be Anne McLellan's old seat in Edmonton.
The downside is if he lost that could well kill his future leadership ambitions, so being a substantial gamble it probably won't happen. Still, that would be a helluva fun campaign and would be huge for the LPC in Alberta.
And as long as I'm dreaming, let's run Bob Rae against Jack in Toronto-Danforth and Arlene Perly Rae against Olivia in Trinity-Spadina. That'd be fun.
Pragmatism vs. Le Flip-flop
When following politics it can be so hard sometimes to know when something is pragmatism, and when it is a flip-flip. Particularly when you insist on filtering everything through a partisan filter like our Blogging Tory friends.
Actually, does throwing-out common sense to tow the party line actually make it easier, not harder to be a shill? Maybe. But anyway, for future reference, here is how it apparently shakes out:
- Stephane Dion saying he doesn’t want to/think he should have to give up his dual citizenship, but that he will if people are genuinely concerned? BTs call that a flip-flop.
- Stephen Harper campaigning to protect income trusts, then reversing himself once he’s in power? BTs call that pragmatism.
- Stephen Harper attacking floor crossing while in opposition, and then accepting one into his caucus, and cabinet? BTs call that pragmatism.
- Stephen Harper promising not to appoint Senators, and saying you need to be elected to be in his cabinet, and then appointing a Senator and putting the unelected Senator into his cabinet? BTs call that pragmatism.
If you answered that it has to do with the addition of the A and the placement of the E and the N after Steph, then full marks for you. Thanks for playing.
As Red points out this morning, the smears that the Conservatives and their blogging army have been trotting-out this far against Dion have been, frankly, rather pathetic. And laced with lots of the usual snide anti-French comments which are sure to help Harper regain ground in Quebec. If this is the best they can do…
This kind of nonsense may play to their base. Swing voters? You’ll need more that beret jokes I think. Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
On the eleventh day of Christmas...
(now with one more reason to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety! (day four))
...Canada's new government gave to me:
11. An arrogant refusal to lower the Parliament Hill flag to half mast when Canadian soldiers die in the line of duty and lies about why they won't
10. A health minister with a 25 per cent stake in a pharmaceutical manufacturer
9. No understanding of what that very important Quebecois nation motion they rammed through the House actually means
8. An e-mail attempting to raise money for the Conservative Party based on Harper's handling of the Lebanon conflict while the bombs were still falling, at a time when Eight Canadians had been killed and thousands more were still waiting for evacuation
7. Silence when interactions were revealed between two senior government members and a listed terrorist group
6. Six months without acting or following-up on the recommendations put forward by the government's wait-times advisor, even though this was one of their five priorities
5. Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
4. Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
3. A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
2. Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
1. And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Thursday, December 21, 2006
So, are just the feminists pigs?
The Conservative/conservative campaign against the Status of Women has been ongoing for a few months now, but back when it was first starting on the blogs it was noted with dismay by many that conservatives kept short-forming it to SOW rather than, say, SWC.
Hey, it's just a coincidence they'd say, that's the abbreviation. We're not trying to imply women are pigs, come on, be serious, our clever conservative friends would insist, feigning outrage.
Well, it seems they're feigning no more. Came across this today, ironically the same day I head about Harper's image concerns. It seems the anti-Status of Women people have their own blogroll now:
And take a closer look at the graphic:
Yes, that would appear to be some kind of half woman, half pig hybrid to my untrained eye.
So, to the members of this blogroll I ask: are you saying women are pigs, just feminists, just those that work at Status of Women? Would that include the Minister responsible, Ms. Oda?
Clarification would be appreciated. Thanks.
Why they dropped the "Progressive" but kept the Conservative
*I'm going to have to subscribe to the Penticton Western news. Stockwell Day's constituency columns are fast becoming must-reads. First there was this, then this, and now this (via Bob):
Aaaaanyway, it appears that local libs now send bits and pieces of my local columns to their favourite spear-chuckers down east who are quick to unleash a volley of indignation, which makes for good fodder back here at home.
I wonder, does he literally mean people who throw spears (do we have any javelin tosses in the LPC?)? Is he perhaps unaware that he used what is commonly known as a racial slur? I find it hard to believe that would be his intent. Maybe he was referring to the chucking of verbal spears? Even so, what a ridiculous choice of words. I mean, who uses expressions like that?
*And then there's Stock's boss, Steve Harper, in one of his year-end interviews. He was asked if he's ever gone for a ride on his wife Laureen's motorcycle (via Michelle):
"You've got to worry about image. I don't want to be on the back with my wife driving."
Classy. We know who the man of that house is, don't we? (As an aside, this even made the Newark Star Ledger, that's weird. It seems Reuters put a piece on the wire)
I suspect though that Stevie will be sleeping on the couch tonight. Wonder if the couch at 24 Sussex folds out?
They started it!
Whenever I read about nonsense like this:
Following the Liberal leadership convention, which saw Stephane Dion assume the party's helm, the Conservative Party website featured a picture of Mr. Dion with Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and John Turner. The caption read "Back to the Future".
I fully intend to post pictures like this:
Or this:
Or maybe even this:
Because, you know, talking about the issues Canadians actually care about (health care, the environment) isn't fun at all is it Stephen?
I'd like to open the floor to clever movie-themed caption suggestions. Maybe Jurassic Park?
Run Gurmant, run!!!
Forget my two front teeth, all I want for Christmas is for Gurmant Grewal to run again for the Conservative Party. Please Santa Harper? I've been good all year! (H/T Cowboys)
Grewal may return to politics
Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun
Published: Wednesday, December 20, 2006
OTTAWA — Former B.C. Conservative MP Gurmant Grewal, who was under a shroud of controversy when he announced last year he wouldn’t seek re-election, said today he’s considering a political comeback.
Grewal, who is still under RCMP investigation in connection with his handling of political donations, said he never intended to leave politics permanently.
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
On the tenth day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
10. A health minister with a 25 per cent stake in a pharmaceutical manufacturer
9. No understanding of what that very important Quebecois nation motion they rammed through the House actually means
8. An e-mail attempting to raise money for the Conservative Party based on Harper's handling of the Lebanon conflict while the bombs were still falling, at a time when Eight Canadians had been killed and thousands more were still waiting for evacuation
7. Silence when interactions were revealed between two senior government members and a listed terrorist group
6. Six months without acting or following-up on the recommendations put forward by the government's wait-times advisor, even though this was one of their five priorities
5. Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
4. Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
3. A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
2. Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
1. And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Law and Order: Conservative Judges Unit
Conservatives have long loved to whine about radical Liberal judges. If a Liberal government made a judicial appointment and the appointee had even walked past a television showing an episode of the West Wing once the howling over bias would begin.
That's why I'm glad to see that, now that they're in power, the Conservatives are righting those wrongs. And the wrong wasn't that some appointees might have been Liberal, or even liberal. The problem was they weren't conservative. Or, better yet, Conservative.
A reader drew my attention today to Justice Minister Vic (is that what the Elections Act says?) Toews' appointment on Monday of one Dallas Miller as a Judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta . Here's his justice department supplied bio:
Mr. Justice Dallas Miller received a Bachelor of Laws in 1984 from the University of Saskatchewan and a Bachelor of Arts (History) in 1992 from Athabasca University ( Alberta). He was admitted to the Bar of Alberta in 1985 and practised with Gordon, Smith & Company in Medicine Hat (1985-1993) before opening his own firm (1993-2006). Mr. Justice Miller’s practice expertise is in the areas of civil litigation, real estate law, wills and estates law and mediation. He has acted as a Member of the Alberta Provincial Court Nominating Committee (2004-2006), as Judicial District Representative for Medicine Hat for the Alberta Civil Trial Lawyers Association, and as Chair of the Board of Directors of International Justice Mission.
Sounds like a swell guy. But there's a few items that the government biography writers overlooked (space restrictions, I'm sure). Such as:
- Alberta campaign co-chair, 2005 Conservative election campaign. Because it helps to have friends in high places, doesn't it?
Still, you also have to have the creds. Here's his:
- He's a member of the Fraser Institute, but it's not as easy to hold that against him these days, now is it? Toooobiiiin!
Luckily, there's more.
- Mr. Miller is tied to Real Women (they of ending the Status of Women fame), and received the group's National Defender of the Family Award in 1998. Defending it from Liberal judges, no doubt.
- He was an executive director and legal counsel for the Canadian wing of the Home School Legal Defence Association, a U.S.-based conservative lobby group. Here's more on them.
- He has represented the Coalition of Responsible Firearm Owners and Sportsmen and the Christian Legal Fellowship and has served on the Religious Liberty Commission of the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. The CLF's moto is "integrating Christian faith and law since 1978."
- He also has ties to Focus on the Family, and has vehemently defended the right to spank. He's also no friend of the now dead Court Challenges program.
- He has intervened in many fun cases too, I'll leave it to others to read through those decisions. Fun stuff.
So, all in all a really swell guy, just the sort we need on the bench. Fair and Balanced (TM). I guess this is Stephen's way of saying to a certain part of his political base, as he gears up for the election he doesn't want until 2009 "Sorry I screwed you on that whole SSM vote sham thing guys. Here's a judicial appointment. Still love me?"
As I said, I guess it pays to have friends in high places. The list is growing:
- Dallas Miller, his Alberta campaign co-chair, gets a judgeship
- Michael Fortier, his national campaign co-chair, gets appointed to Senate AND a cabinet post
- John Reynolds, his other national campaign co-chair and now a non-lawyer advisor (not lobbyist!) with a law firm, gets appointed to the Queen's Privy Council for Canada
Someone might want to go over the rest of the list if they have time and see how all the other co-chair are faring under Canada's New Government. And don't forget Gwyn Morgan too.
Anyway, what was that Mulroney quote again? Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Help Stanley Park and buy a tree
You may have heard something about the wind storms that have been lashing British Columbia recently. They've been pretty bad. And particularly hard hit has been Stanley Park, one of the jewels of Vancouver (some pictures here).
I used to live in Vanouver at Robson and Cardero, not far from Stanley Park, and I used to love riding my bike along the seawall any chance I'd get. And stopping at a park bench by the Lion's Gate bridge, sitting back, smelling the salt air and just taking in how lucky I was to live in such a beautiful, amazing city.
I watched aerial footage of the damage last night and it's just devastating. They say the park lost more than 1000 trees after it was battered by near hurricane force winds, including a 200-year-old Hemlock. Clean-up will take months, if not longer, and even then the park won't be the same.
The Vancouver Parks board, with the help of media like CKNW, is launching a campaign to raise donations to help replace the lost trees in Stanley Park. Every bit helps, but donations over $50 are tax receiptable. More information available here if you can help.
Media groans
Far be it from me to pick on the media. You know, being a member of the media and all. It's really so easy though, and there's a few examples today in my morning reading that were particularly annoying:
Take the editorial (subscribers only) in today's Globe, my morning hard copy read of choice (I avoid the local Toronto papers, lest I be reminded of where I live). On a piece about Stephane Dion's dream team appointments yesterday, the editors criticize Dion for only including Central Canadians on his dream team, and just one woman, Martha-Hall Findlay, another Central Canadian (I think they mean Ontarioin…Ontarioite?).
A few things. First of all, while they mention Iggy, Rae, Gerard and Martha, they very conveniently forget to mention the guy co-writing the platform with Rae. Perhaps because it doesn't support their thesis. That would be Scott Brison. Last I checked he was from Nova Scotia.
Also, this is just the first round of announcements, and you'll notice it involved only candidates from the leadership race. That's the pool he was working from for this announcement, and it was a pool that included just one woman and a bunch of people from Ontario. Shadow cabinet should be announced in the New Year; that's when we should be scrutinizing the choices for balance along regional, gender and ethnic lines.
I will grant one point to the Globe's editors though. The fact the list of leadership candidates lacked such diversity is troubling, and signals there is work to be done. And I'm confident it will be.
Then there's Don Martin's fawning column in today's National comPost. He owes me $3.50 for Rolaids. He concedes Harper is no Al Gore on the environment (no merde Don) but claims Harper has found religion on climate change (apparently since last week when he talked about "so-called global warming). Muldoon must have given him a really good scolding.
But, here' a particularly ridiculous passage from Martin:
First move, thaw relations with the frozen-out media in Ottawa.
Four unprecedented moves -- his first Ottawa news conference in half a year, an appearance at the press gallery kids' Christmas party, a series of year-end print interviews and a media bash at 24 Sussex -- suggest his permafrost heart for all things journalism is melting faster than the polar ice cap.
Unprecedented? You're kidding me, right Don? Holding a news conference is unprecedented? Stopping by a kids Christmas party is unprecedented? A media Christmas party is unprecedented? The PM giving year-end media interviews is unprecedented? You mean, it doesn't happen EVERY YEAR?
Let me put it slightly into context for you Don. While these things are standard practice for every other PM, they ARE unprecedented for Steve-o. Because it is him that is responsible for the temperature of his relationship with the media. It was his Mr. Freeze routine.
You want us to give him credit for not being as much of a jerk anymore, because now he's gearing up for an election and has to make nice? That's like calling someone a hero for calling the fire department when THEY started the fire in the first place.
On the ninth day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
9. No understanding of what that very important Quebecois nation motion they rammed through the House actually means
8. An e-mail attempting to raise money for the Conservative Party based on Harper's handling of the Lebanon conflict while the bombs were still falling, at a time when Eight Canadians had been killed and thousands more were still waiting for evacuation
7. Silence when interactions were revealed between two senior government members and a listed terrorist group
6. Six months without acting or following-up on the recommendations put forward by the government's wait-times advisor, even though this was one of their five priorities
5. Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
4. Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
3. A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
2. Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
1. And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Let's give 'er to John A.
It’s bad enough when Liberals try to fight a leadership race on Pierre Trudeau. Now it seems Stephen Harper wants to fight the next election against the late Prime Minister.
The Conservative government’s offensive to regain the support of Quebecers started today with Prime Minister Stephen Harper taking aim at the costly, “big dream” ideas of Pierre Trudeau… “In allowing the farmers of Mirabel to re-acquire their land, we are correcting a mistake of history and we are looking towards the future”… “It was done in what was called the `national interest,”’ Harper said. “It was at the time an omni-present, centralizing government.”
Boy this Trudeau guy really sounds like he sucks, I’m sure not voting for him! Oh, wait…I said earlier we need to set the agenda of the next election. So I say we need to fight the next campaign against Sir. John A. MacDonald. We can’t abide another Pacific scandal! Or excessive drinking! And I hear he was Scottish too!
But back to the Mirabel story. Interesting quotes here from Stephen:
“True nationalists are builders.”
and
The Liberal government of that time had large, costly projects…
and
“In four decades I’d probably be dead — I’m sure that I will be dead.”
Rather morbid, Stephen. I mean, you were born 1959, making you some 47 years young. Meaning, in 40 years you’ll be 87 years old. No spring chicken to be sure, but let’s be optimistic now. With diet, exercise and advances in medical science (unless you replace medical research funding with tax breaks for asprin or something) 87 is hardly out of the ballpark for you. Chin up.
But anyway, it was the contrast in the comments that more interested me. Just what does our “true nationalist” (sorry all you false nationalists) plan on building? He’s always struck me as more of a devolver myself, and I’m not sure breaking things up counts as building.
Anyway, whatever he builds clearly he isn’t thinking more than 40 years down the road, since he’s sure he’ll be dead and all. Myself, I suspect he’s not thinking much beyond the next election.
But whatever he builds, let’s keep an eye on the foundation.
On the eighth day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
8. An e-mail attempting to raise money for the Conservative Party based on Harper's handling of the Lebanon conflict while the bombs were still falling, at a time when Eight Canadians had been killed and thousands more were still waiting for evacuation
7. Silence when interactions were revealed between two senior government members and a listed terrorist group
6. Six months without acting or following-up on the recommendations put forward by the government's wait-times advisor, even though this was one of their five priorities
5. Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
4. Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
3. A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
2. Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
1. And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Monday, December 18, 2006
I guess some promises count more than others
I wonder how Mr. Harper decides which promises we’re supposed to hold him to and which we’re supposed to give him a pass for ignoring because, hey, that was like a year ago. I’m interested in the question from a purely academic point of view. I’m genuinely curious.
For example, Globe blogger Dan Cook raises a very good question today about Harper promises:
Over at PM Steve's website, he's trumpeting the fact that he followed through on an opposition motion from 2004. That's nice. Now, how about this campaign promise from September 20, 2005: "A Conservative government led by Stephen Harper will remove the GST on all the federal taxes the Liberals collect on each litre of gas bought." Don't hold your breath; It's been conveniently deleted from the Conservative website, but the archived copy is available here.
P.S. How about them excising the promise from their Web site? Winston would be proud.
Setting the agenda and framing the question
I'd say winter is in the air, but here in the Centre of the Universe the weather has been decidedly warmish lately. Election fever is definitely in the air though, and how successful we are in the coming vote will depend largely on our ability to influence the issues the election is fought on. We need to set the question.
On timing, it seems increasingly a given that we will be going to the polls at some point in the spring. The only question would seem to be if it's on the budget, or before on an issue of the opposition's choosing. All things being equal I'd prefer to wait; the LPC needs to organize, fundraise and develop a platform. This work is happening, but it takes time.
Things being unequal, however, I'd rather not have to fight an election on a Conservative budget sprinkled with big spending promises around transfers to the provinces and tax cuts for selected demographic interest groups. Enabled by a decade of sound Liberal fiscal management, but that's moving off topic.
It's better to go on an issue more of our choosing. Will it be the environment? Afghanistan? Time will tell, but better an issue like one of these. While neither are perfect issues for the LPC, both are issues we can make strong arguments on and that will play well in much of the country for us, and particularly in some key regions.
Which brings me to the point of this post: issues. We need to frame the debate around our issues, and try as hard as possible to keep the focus on the issues we want to run on, rather than the issues Harper wants to run on. Harper's going to try to move the debate to the issues he wants to run on, where he sees plusses for him and minuses for us; we need to keep on offence and off defence.
For example, Senate reform. Harper made a splash last week with some empty proposals that garnered a lot of media and blogshpere attention. It's an issue that sounds great on the surface, let's reform the Senate. Who could say no? But, like most Harper proposals, the details don't match the rhetoric. His reform proposals are hollow, more show than substance. He obviously feels though this will play well with Canadians.
Outside of his Alberta base I have my doubts, but either way if we get bogged down in a debate on Senate reform that's time we're not spending talking about the environment and the sustainable economy, about Afghanistan, about health care, about infrastructure development.
As much as possible we need to keep the debate on our issues. Our ability in setting the agenda on that front in the next election will be crucial to our success. Last campaign we let the Conservatives set the agenda early and we never got back in the game. We were stuck reacting, rather than making news.
We can't afford to make that mistake again.
On the seventh day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
Silence when interactions were revealed between two senior government members and a listed terrorist group
Six months without acting or following-up on the recommendations put forward by the government's wait-times advisor, even though this was one of their five priorities
Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
And a decrease in my take-home pay.
On sports and tax breaks
More proof emerging today that British Columbia has always been viewed by Conservative power brokers as the weak sister in the traditional Alberta/BC support base of the Reform/Alliance/Conservative Party. For further proof, consider how BC will be screwed by Harper's Senate reform proposal.
I understand the philosophical and ideological differences here. The Conservatives are all about tax breaks while the Liberals, who BTW also brought in some of the largest targeted tax breaks Canada has seen, favour targeted program spending and infrastructure spending.
I have to ask though, as logical as giving people a tax credit for spending on sports programs is, how good is it going to be if there aren't any sports facilities to host the programs? Just wondering.
Ottawa says province's building expectations are unrealistically high
Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun
Published: Monday, December 18, 2006
OTTAWA -- The Conservative government is refusing to fully participate in a B.C. sports facility building boom launched by Premier Gordon Campbell during a pre-2005-election spending spree, The Vancouver Sun has learned.
While the federal Tories haven't formally ruled out meeting the more than $70 million in requests for projects, they say the former Liberal government headed by Paul Martin created unrealistically high expectations that Ottawa would match Victoria's largesse.
(more)
Sunday, December 17, 2006
Questioning authority
Took a stroll by the Conservative Party's youth Web site today. It seems they're all about questioning authority. Interesting, that. I look forward to their hard, inquisitive, no-holes barred questioning of authority then. I'm sure it will include such authorities as the Prime Minister, his cabinet, and Canada's new government, as there's no authorities higher. And I hear Stephen loves it when his authority is questioned. Just ask Garth. I'm sure they'll start questioning authority and sticking it to the man any day now.
On the sixth day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
Six months without acting or following-up on the recommendations put forward by the government's wait-times advisor, even though this was one of their five priorities
Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Am I as effective as the NDP?
I’ll go back to ragging on the Conservatives tomorrow, but tonight I’d like to turn my attention to the New Democratic Party of Jack Layton. Off topic, but how long can they be the New Democratic Party? It’s like the Cons calling themselves Canada’s New Government. What’s the shelf-life on newness?
But I’ve digressed. An interesting e-mail wound-up in my inbox recently. It supposedly detailed all the NDP’s accomplishments in this fall session of Parliament. This is a sensitive area for Jack’s Dippers. While I think reports of their death have been greatly exaggerated, they are under pressure from May’s Greens and Dion’s Liberals and; after asking people to lend him their votes last election; Jack needs to show results.
Read the fine print of the NDP’s propaganda though and you see the NDP’s list of accomplishments is short on actual, well, accomplishments. Unless you count raising issues and introducing motions or bills that failed and/or went no where. For example, announcing “a 3-step plan to reduce student debt in Canada by 25%” or calling “for a national transit and a green urban strategy” is great, but is it really an accomplishment when no plan or strategy is implemented? I know what those students would say.
But, I guess it depends on your definition of the word accomplishments. If we’re going to use the NDP definition, which seems to be mainly raising an issue and talking about it, supporting something somebody else is doing or opposing something somebody else is doing, I thought it might be fun to see what I’ve accomplished this session, and how my effectiveness compared to the NDP’s.
I counted 43 so-called accomplishments on the NDP’s list. That’s quite a few. A tough act to follow. So, what did I “accomplish” this session? I’ll leave out LPC specific stuff, which included the leadership race and party reform. Here’s a list:
*Highlighted the Conservative abandonment of Canada’s robotics industry and neglect of the Canadian Space Agency, and called for action.
*Raised the issue of the squandering of $9 million of taxpayer dollars by the Conservatives to move the National Portrait Gallery to Stephen Harper’s home riding.
*Opposed the House of Commons motion recognizing the Quebecois as a nation.
*Opposed recognition of the so-called fiscal imbalance.
*Helped expose Conservative back room shenanigans.
*Like the NDP, I helped secure a state funeral for Canada’s last surviving WWI veteran.
*Again like the NDP, I pushed for greater decorum in the House of Commons and in wider political discourse.
*Struck a blow against asholes everywhere, and one in Victoria specifically.
*Fought for tax relief for average working Canadians.
*Exposed Conservative travel practices and misuse.
*Helped bring to light truth distortions by the environment minister.
*Helped force the government to stand against an US man convicted of child abuse being sentenced to live in Canada.
*Spoke against the Conservative’s rumoured Defence of Marriage legislation.
*Supported the Progressive Bloggers “5 things feminism has done for me” project.
*Called attention to the Conservatives breaking their promise to British Columbians on leaky condos.
*Told the story of a small Comox Valley flooring manufacturer that has been left in the cold by Harper’s softwood sellout.
*Like the NDP, I fought against Conservative cuts to the Status of Women.
So, I count roughly 17 accomplishments (NDP definition) by myself this fall. While that is less than the 43 the NDP managed, I would submit that, given the fact I have a caucus of one, no research budget and a full time job, that’s not too shabby.
In fact, the NDP’s 29-member caucus managed 43 accomplishments, a 1.48 accomplishments effectiveness rate. With a caucus of one, I managed a 17 accomplishments for a 17 accomplishments effectiveness rate, and all for 0 taxpayer dollars. Not too shabby indeed.
With the Liberal leadership race no longer distracting me I fully intend to challenge the NDP on the accomplishments front in the next session of Parliament, and give Layton a run for his money. Watch out Jack!
Satire:
| 1. | the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc. |
| 2. | a literary composition, in verse or prose, in which human folly and vice are held up to scorn, derision, or ridicule. |
| 3. | a literary genre comprising such compositions. |
On the fifth day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
Five charter flights averaging $3600 a pop by the Minister of Veterans Affairs
Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Friday, December 15, 2006
The Parisian Candidate
Hilarious column by Wells. I've always felt the best way to combat right-wing buffonery is with biting satire. I also like to throw in a dollop of sarcasm from time to time, but that's just me.
I'd just like to caution Ezra Levant though: Evra, this is satire, not investigative journalism, so don't get your knickers in a twist. You see, there was this movie called The Manchurian Candidate. I think they remade it recently with Denzel, but see the original. (H/T Miranda.)
PAUL WELLS
Fade in...
Interior. Stornaway, the residence of Canada's leader of the Opposition. Packing crates are everywhere; men in overalls carry boxes back and forth. Stéphane Dion enters, leading his dog Kyoto.
Dion: Well, here we are, almost moved in after only a few weeks as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada!
There is a knock at the door.
Dion: Who could that be?
Dion opens the door. The French Ambassador enters, a menacing figure in a black cape, who bears an odd resemblance to Angela Lansbury.
French Ambassador: Would you like to play zee cards, Monsieur Dion?
French Ambassador begins shuffling a deck of cards. He pulls out one in particular: the red queen. Dion is instantly hypnotized.
French Ambassador: Ah, I see your training still work! You are starting to rememb-air zee mission, aren't you?
(read the rest)
And he's going to neutralize the "so-called" environmental issue?
In one of his oh-so-rare press conferences yesterday, PM Steve Harper referred to “so-called greenhouse gases.” This, not that long after Stock Day displayed zero understanding and extreme skepticism about the science of climate change and at the end of a week of endless stories about how Rona Ambrose is about to be dumped as Harper’s environment minister for, well, sheer incompetence I guess.
It’s interesting, as this all comes not long after the Star’s Chantal Hebert mused Harper and Jack Layton might come up with some kind of big-bang environmental policy to neutralize the environment as an issue for the Dion Liberals and May Greens in the next election.
I think they’re going to have their work cut out for them though. How are they going to come up with an environmental policy that neutralizes the environment as an election issue when they don’t even believe in such a fundamental part of the science as greenhouses gases?
I don't blame him for having trouble coming-up with a plan to fight greenhouse gases. After all, I'd have a hard time coming up with a credible plan to control the so-called unicorn population. The only thing is, one of those things actually do exist.
On the fourth day of Christmas...
...Canada's new government gave to me:
Four-plus reasons to be embarrassed about our Minister of Public Safety
A former lobbyist for the defence industry as Minister of National Defence
Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Thursday, December 14, 2006
Stephen Diefenbaker?
The excessive hyperbole of this CBC article aside, this is just a baffling decision by the Harper government, and I believe the concerns over a brain drain here are legitimate.
In a nutshell, Canada is a world leader in the robotics industry, particularly in the field of space exploration. Heck, they don’t call it the Canadarm for nothing. The European Space Agency is planning a mission to Mars (an actual mission, not a screening of the movie of the same name) in 2015 and they wanted Canada to built a rover for them.
A great opportunity for Canada to showcase and build on its world-leading robotics expertise, and participate in an exciting mission of exploration. It’s the kind of think that excites young people in the sciences, producing the next generation of innovators. And innovation, as economists will no doubt tell you, fuels economic growth.
But, back to the rover. The Canadian Space Agency was onboard. The Europeans were on board. The Americans were onboard too; they saw the work as helping lay the groundwork for NASA’s own mission back to the moon in 2020; a mission they see Canada’s robotics expertise playing a big role in.
The only people that weren’t on board yet were Canada’s New Conservative Government. Didn’t seem like it would be an issue though. After all, the CSA didn’t need Harper to write a cheque or anything. The CSA proposed funding the project completely through a reallocation of its existing resources and a shuffling of the agency’s priorities. All they needed from the Cons was a thumbs-up.
Instead, inexplicably, Harper’s industry minister, Maxime Bernier, turned the CSA down and killed the project. He said the Cons haven’t decided what they want the CSA to be doing yet (maybe that’s why the Harper Conservatives have left the CSA leaderless for over a year). So, while Bernier and Harper dither, no mission to Mars for the CSA.
The decision has left the Canadian robotics industry reeling, threatening to move South of the border and take its research talent (and high-paying jobs) along with it, warning of another brain drain akin to the one that followed the decision of another Conservative PM, John Diefenbaker, to cancel the Avro Arrow program.
You can argue we just couldn’t afford the Arrow; frankly, I find the comparison overly simplistic myself. But the fact is the rover project would have been funded through existing resources, so the money isn’t a legitimate excuse. Frankly, the Conservatives haven’t been able to come up with one yet.
The fear of a brain drain, however, is very real. Following the success the previous Liberal government had championing research and development and luring top Canadian talent that had left the country back to Canada, this is a troubling development indeed.
On the third day of Christmas...
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
On the second day of Christmas...
…Canada’s new government gave to me:
Two broken promises in one unelected, unaccountable Senator/Minister
And a decrease in my take-home pay.
Where are the mountains?
I’m in Mountain View, California tonight (Silicon Valley) for a quick business trip. Flying back to Toronto on the redeye Wednesday night. Haven’t viewed any mountains yet, but it’s dark. I’ll keep you posted.
A bit late in the year for a trip, and it’s tough to come all the way out here for just one day, but this trip will bump me up to Aeroplan Elite status for next year. Free diet cokes in the Maple Leaf Lounge, here I come! Also, I’ll be able to bypass the plebes and check-in at the executive check-in line, befitting the arrogant Liberal I’ve always been at (my cold, tiny) heart. And I’m sure I’ll be entitled to various other entitlements as well, so good times a comin’.
It’s a 5+ hours plus flight from Toronto to San Francisco, but the special edition of Maclean’s I picked up at the airport newsstand helped pass a good chunk of the time. Lots of great pics, and another Paul Wells opus that was a very good review of the lead-up to and the events of convention week. Some really good factoids and stories in the piece I hadn’t heard before thatadded some more dimension to the convention, well worth a read. Exactly what you’re looking for from a news weekly. Also, a good interview with Dion in the mag as well.
I’m wondering though, why is Barbara Amiel still writing a column, and who reads it? It was on Dion so I felt compelled to try, but I just couldn’t finish it. If I could summarize it, I guess her message is he’s a nerd but she likes it. And what was with Feschuk writing about thongs?
Anyway, pick up a copy if you wander by a newsstand. I need to rest up before a day of everything you wanted to know about server virtualization, but were afraid to ask.
Tuesday, December 12, 2006
On the first day of Christmas...
…Canada's new government gave to me:
A decrease in my take-home pay.
*A new series continuing daily for, well, 11 more days.
Monday, December 11, 2006
The next leadership field
Macleans.ca had a highly speculative piece today postulating the field of contenders for the next Liberal leadership race. I think they’re way off base though. Here’s my prediction for the next field, which I think is still some ways away (I’m guessing 2016):
Steve Zucker: An Ivy league professor, this Canadian teaches computer science at Yale, where they talk of "Zuckermania."
Gary Doer: By this time he’ll be the former NDP Premier of Manitoba, ‘nuff said.
Gail Nyberg: The director of Toronto’s Daily Bread foodbank. I think she’s NDP, but after the NDP is swallowed by the Green Party in two years she joins the provincial Liberals and becomes education minister.
Stephane Roussel: An assistant professor of political science at the Université du Québec à Montréal, specializing in foreign and defence policy. After forming a government later this year Dion will call Roussel into public service to be the Stephane to his Stephane and solve the Afghanistan quagmire.
Long shots with shots:
Paul Martin, Jr.: No, no, not him. His son. Because how long can we go without a Paul Martin in a Liberal leadership race? It’s time for the third generation.
Ben Mulroney: Dad will be shocked too. But too much time spent in lefty La La Land will corrupt young Ben away from his Conservative roots.
Remember folks, you heard it here first.
Bad policy, but what bad messaging
Besides my simple befuddlement at this decision by the McGuinty government (the suit seems like a no-brainer to me) I'd have to think his communications people are cringing at how this story will play.
I don't know what Dalton said that resulted in the bolded portion of the paraphrasing below, but this is soo not the message you want to be sending, particularly when you're gearing up for an election next year.
But Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty says his government doesn't want to punish big tobacco, and warns there's “considerable doubt” about the likely success of a lawsuit.
I'm sure big tobacco appreciates that, I'm just not sure big Ontarioins, not to mention small Ontarioins and medium-sized Ontarioins, will feel the same. Nor would they really consider it punishment either, I suspect, but rather justice.
Canadian Press
Toronto — Ontario is refusing to join six other provinces in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit against big tobacco companies, and will let British Columbia lead the legal fight.
B.C., Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador all plan to sue to recover health-care costs related to smoking.
(more)
Orange and blue make greyish brown, not green
The Star's Hebert opines this morning that the NDP and the Conservatives may try to make some cooperative environmental policy splash before the next election to demonstrate their Green creds, concerned as they are with a resurgent Elizabethan Green Party and the Dion-led Liberal green revolution.
--
In the wake of Stéphane Dion's leadership victory, getting the environment card off the table before the next campaign has become an absolute priority for both Stephen Harper and Jack Layton.
--
Even if Harper came up with the most aggressive environment plan in decades at this point, it would have little credibility without some outside support. The imprimatur of the NDP could make the difference.
--
The climate-change sections of the bill have lots of blanks begging to be filled. If the NDP and the Conservatives can come to a meeting of the minds, the environment may yet be neutralized as a leading-edge election issue.
--
While I agree with Chantal's thesis, I'm doubtful the NDP and the Cons could pull it off. It's an interesting strategic proposition though.
The environment aside, the NDP desperately needs to show a win before the next election. They need to show they've accomplished something, they need to justify the whole lent vote thing, or they risk their vote bleeding both to the Liberals and the Greens. On the other side, being seen as cozying-up to/propping-up the Conservatives is a risk for the NDP; and something that would surely be exploited by our Liberal spin machine (now retrofitted to run on hydrogen power).
And on the environment, could the NDP and the Cons find enough common ground to come together on a deal? There would be a lot of needles to thread to convince their respective constituencies it's not a sell-out. I'm doubtful.
Also, if they're to neutralize the environment as an election issue, in theory, this would have to be one comprehensive, all-encompassing, end-to-end save the environment kind of a thing. OK, it's fixed they'd say, moving on.
You don't fix the environment in one fell swoop, and particularly not with a desperate pre-election face-saving gambit. It's going to take lots of thinking, lots of debate, lots of compromise, and a consensus built amongst Canadians over time. There are no quick and easy fixes on this file, no matter how badly Jack, Stephen, and indeed all Canadians may want one.
As Scott Brison said in his convention speech, it's the environment, stupid. And it will continue to be for a long, long time.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Harper playing pork barrel politics?
In all the excitement last week around SSM and the whole freedom fries thing this one seemed to fly under the radar. I still think it's worth bringing up however. After all, what's the point in being in government if you can't direct plum projects to your own riding, right Stephen? It's just too bad about that wasted $9 million in taxpayer dollars.
And just as background, here's a little more on the Harper/Encana connection. I hope Gwyn is doing well.
National Portrait Gallery: 'It's pork barrel politics'
Documents and leaks to an Ottawa MP point to the gallery being built in Calgary, home to the Prime Minister's riding, and partly funded by EnCana
VAL ROSS
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
Although an Ottawa home for the proposed National Portrait Gallery is already under way -- more than $9-million worth of work has been done on a magnificent Beaux Arts building on Wellington Street -- an Ottawa MP says the gallery will go to Calgary.
NDP MP Paul Dewar had made an access-to-information request for documents related to the portrait gallery. All but two sentences in the 42 pages he obtained were blacked out, but Dewar says they, and subsequent government leaks, indicate that gallery will be built in the city of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's home riding, partly funded by energy giant EnCana. "It's pork barrel politics," Dewar told The Globe and Mail. "And no one is denying it."
(more)
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersSaturday, December 09, 2006
Why won’t Tony answer?
Stephen Harper has now waded into this whole contrived dual citizenship nonsense, taking a thinly veiled cheap shot at Stephane Dion on the subject. Ladies and gentleman, our Prime Minister:
Stephen Harper took a thinly disguised jab at Stéphane Dion, subtly suggesting Friday the new Liberal leader might want to surrender his French citizenship.
The prime minister noted Gov.-Gen. Michaëlle Jean gave up her French citizenship shortly after being named to the vice-regal post.
“As you know the Governor General was faced with a similar decision and I certainly supported her decision when she gave up her (French) citizenship,” Mr. Harper said when asked about the matter.
“Obviously, I think everyone has a right to select options under the law, they have to use their own political judgment.”
Very Prime Ministerial Steve. But, ok. I would submit though that if such a precedent exists, and is being expanded as you suggest from just the vice-regal position, should that precedent not also include ministers of the crown? After all, cabinet ministers are very much in a position to set and influence government policy, and regularly have to meet and negotiate with their international counterparts. How many crowns can they be loyal to at once?
Which brings me to Tony Clement. Your Minister of Health was born in England. Manchester, to be exact. Is he a dual citizen? We don’t know, his office refused to return repeated media calls on the topic. Maybe he’ll return your calls Steve. Because, while I for one would never, ever question Tony’s commitment to Canada, other people might. What if he were participating in international negotiations on a health care issue involving England? Or dropping the puck at a Canada/England hockey game?
Of course it’s a silly argument to make, and I feel silly for making it. I’m just wondering though Steve, and I’ll ask you because you’ve now decided to toss your beret into the ring, if we’re expanding the precedent as you suggest just how far do you want to extend it? If you’re going to draw a line arbitrarily, say leaders but not cabinet, you need to explain why.
So, I ask Steve, is your Minister of Health a dual citizen? And if so, will you require him to renounce his British citizenship to remain in your cabinet? If you won't, why not?
P.S. Speaking of potential conflicts, when you're talking to Tony could you ask your health minister if he ever sold his stock in that pharmaceutical company?
Memories on E-Bay
What price can you put on memories? Well, that depends, but so far they’re looking pretty cheap. Weren’t in Montreal? Not to worry, just swing by E-Bay.
Unsurprisingly, Dion swag seems to be the priciest, although only by comparison. There’s been five bids so far on this funky green Dion hat (I know I plan to wear mine everywhere so I’m not giving it up), with the bidding currently at $28.76.
And seven bids have been placed on this red Dion pin, with the top bid currently at $5.50. No bids yet on this green Dion tee, with the floor at $19.54.
It’s not just Dion swag being auctioned off either.
Need an Iggy nation shirt? The bidding starts at $10.34.
The fellow selling this Bob Rae pin that targets the womens vote has started the bidding at $32.19, a price a little too rich to attract any bids so far.
The bidding on these two Joe Volpe signs starts at $5.74. Or it would, no one has placed a bid yet. The seller tells us though that they are “very collectible.”
So, looks like no one is getting rich auctioning off their Montreal memories.
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
Friday, December 08, 2006
Random thoughts on a Friday
*Blogstravaganza!: In Toronto? Tonight it's time for another Blogstravaganza. It's a chance for bloggers, those that read blogs, and just plain political junkies and their friends to get together for beverages. Conservatives, Liberals, Greens, heck even Dippers. And non-political blogging types too, it's all good. The event after the last election was a great success with a very large turnout, from the Zerb on the left to Coyne on the right and Kinsella somewhere in-between. The dets:
Come join fellow bloggers on Friday, December 8, 2006 at Toronto's Fiddler's Green, 27 Wellesley Street East - right across from Wellesley subway station on the Yonge line. We should have the second floor reserved.
People will likely start showing-up around 8 pm-ish.
*Dion would sacrifice French citizenship to become PM: Sadly, this seemed inevitable, but it's probably for the best. He shouldn't have to; I've really heard no compelling reasons why he should besides political expediency. And I hate to give the loonies like Ezra any kind of victory. Still, if this really does bother people it's right to just put it to rest and move on. Let's not let these kinds of sideshows distract from the real issues that matter to Canadians.
*Green Party leader heaps praise on Dion: Elizabeth May really shines in this article, and I don't just say so because she's saying nice things about Dion. But she's displaying a principled and practical approach to politics and setting up a role for her party as a real influencer of policy, supplanting the role that the NDP has traditionally tried to historically fill, but has fumbled at of late (lend me your vote?). If I were Jack I'd be getting worried. And, apropos of nothing, but wouldn't May look great as environment minister in a Liberal/Green coalition government, leading the charge on Dion's third pillar? Hey, I can dream, can't I?
*Credit where it's due: There were rumblings from Vic Toews as late as Wednesday that he was ready with some kind of "defence of marriage" legislation if they lost the SSM vote. However, after the vote yesterday Harper firmly ruled that out. Governance should be above pandering to your base, so now that he's gotten his symbolic pandering out of the way with the vote I'm glad we're finally moving on.
*Bloggers on CPAC: Lastly, this Sunday at 7est/4pst you can tune into CPAC for a special doc by Ken Rockburn that takes you inside the blogger batcave at last week's Liberal convention. It's like a comment section come to life, but without the trolls. And with comfy chairs.
Sunday, December 10 at 7PM ET / 4PM PT
In this special one hour documentary Ken Rockburn speaks to some of the people involved in the two campaigns and also pays a visit to the newcomers at the convention, the bloggers who shared their own insights to what was happening on the floor and the back hallways of the campaign.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
You have an option, sir
Mr. McVety said the defection of people who have opposed same-sex marriage in the past will not send a good message about the Conservative Party or democracy.
“People feel they have no option, they have five anti-marriage parties and no reason to vote. They get disenchanted and they stay home,” he said.
Dear Mr. McVety,
I'm writing to tell you that you, and your fellow social Conservatives, do have an option, sir. But first, let me say that I feel your pain.
It hurts to lose your partner, be they opposite or same sex, and that is what has happened here. The Conservative Party has left you. And after all you've done for them that must really sting.
You were there for them when they were just getting started, when they were just a nascent little Western protest party with a nerdy leader and a dream. While they were getting their political education and pursuing their dreams you supported them, your votes brought them to the House of Commons and later made them the official opposition.
Then, though, they adopted the Progressive Conservatives, and they didn't have as much time for you anymore. "We've graduated now, we want to form a government so we've got to be pragmatic," they'd say. "We still love you, just stay quiet, don't embarrass us. We're doing all this for you baby!"
But are they really? Do they really love you, and respect all that you've done for them? After all, if it wasn't for your socially conservative brethren they wouldn't even be in government. And now, they want to throw away their faithful partner of so many years for some young, blonde, centrist trophy vote? When all you both worked for together is just paying off?
Because that's what they're doing, Charles. Sure, they promised you a vote on re-opening SSM, but it's a sham. They're playing you for a fool, and you're letting them. If they were really serious they'd use the notwithstanding clause. Instead they keep whispering sweet nothings, and doing sweet nothing too.
The love affair is over Charles. Face it; he's just not that into you. Don't let yourselves be the doormat of the Conservative party, the good wife waiting at home with his paper, a martini shaker and hundreds of thousands of votes.
You deserve better Charles, and you do have an option. I'd like to introduce you to a fine young suitor I think is just perfect for you and your friends. They're called the Christian Heritage Party of Canada. They're you're kind of people, and they'll treat you right, the way you deserve. They're Canada's only pro-life, pro-family political party.
You guys will get along great, I just know it. And be sure to bring along your MP friends who are also stuck in this abusive relationship. Don't they deserve to get out too?
I know it may seem hard now, but you know you can't let yourselves be played for fools any longer. In the long run, you'll be much happier.
Will John Cummins be the next Garth Turner?
The outspoken Conservative MP from British Columbia doesn't think so, but we all know how well PM Harper handles dissent and disagreement in his caucus.
Cummins, the MP for Delta-Richmond East, is speaking out in the Vancouver Sun this morning about native fishing rights and the first treaty agreement in B.C. to be endorsed by the Harper government. Cummins claims the agreement bestows what he calls a "race-based commercial fishery" on the small band in the Prince George area.
He references Harper's promise in a letter to a Calgary newspaper in July that promised the government would "oppose racially divided fisheries." While Cummins doesn't outright say Harper broke the promise, the implication is clear. "I think I'll leave it to the prime minister to explain his actions and to the public to interpret them," Cummins said.
I'm not sure Stephen will appreciate the nuance, John. While he's not blogging about it, Cummins has produced a "blistering" 39-page report on the treaty that he sent to Harper and Jim Prentice, and gave to the Sun yesterday.
For what it's worth, while I haven't followed treaty and fishery issues that closely recently, in principle I'd come down against Cummins here. Harper's comments in July were inaccurate and divisive, and while a balance needs to be struck between the rights of native and non-native fishers, if the Harper government is backing off the hard-line and talking a more nuanced approach I'd welcome that. Interesting to watch though will be the reaction of commercial fishermen, of whom Cummins was once one, and who make up a great deal of the Conservative base in British Columbia, to a policy shift. This is a very charged issue on that West Coast that will need to be handled delicately.
Anyway, looks like you may have some company soon Garth.
Delta treaty worth $120M
Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun
Published: Thursday, December 07, 2006
OTTAWA -- Conservative MP John Cummins broke with the Tory government Wednesday to say its policy of finalizing native treaties in B.C. runs counter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's vow to oppose racially divided West Coast commercial fisheries.
Cummins' blistering 39-page report on the first treaty to be endorsed by the Harper cabinet, for a tiny band in Prince George, comes on the eve of two more expected treaty announcements in B.C. on Friday and Saturday.
(more)
Wednesday, December 06, 2006
Another question
Dear Jack and Pat,
It was with interest that I read recently your contention that that leaders of political parties should not hold not hold dual citizenship.
I have to say I don’t agree with your position there, but luckily the right to spirited debate and differing opinions is consistent with both Canadian and French citizenship, so I think we’re on safe ground there.
I would appreciate it though if you could enlighten and clarify your position here a bit for me, so I could better understand how it is in the spirit of the social democratic ideals that the New Democratic Party was founded on, and strives every day to uphold.
According to Statistics Canada, appx. 557,000 Canadians, or 1.8 per cent of the population, hold dual citizenship. We’ve established that you feel they shouldn’t be party leaders. I’m wondering, are there any other positions you feel they should be excluded from?
At least 41 Members of Parliament were born in other countries, and therefore may hold or be entitled to hold dual citizenship. This includes a number of your own caucus members. For example, Peter Stoffer was born in the Netherlands, Libby Davies was born in England and of course your partner, Olivia Chow, was born in Hong Kong. All three make strong contributions to the House of Commons, and I think their cultural backgrounds are assets that contribute to a greater and more vibrant debate that truly reflects the diversity of a multicultural Canada.
If you feel that dual citizens shouldn’t be party leaders though, is that where you draw the line or would you include MPs? How about provincial premiers and legislators? Mayors? Supreme Court justices? School district trustees?
I’m just looking to better understand the limits the NDP feels multicultural Canadians should face in Canada before they’re forced to abandon their heritage. I appreciate your willingness to help me better understand your position.
Yours in solidarity,
Jeff
P.S. You may be interested in reading what some members of your party feel about your policy here.
A question
Dear Ezra,
If I write a column on something reported on by, say, the Globe and Mail some three months earlier, does that qualify as a scoop too?
From the G&M September 6, 2006:
Mr. Dion was the second of four boys and a girl who grew up in Sillery, a leafy, affluent suburb, though acquaintances note that the book-filled family home was a relatively modest one.
Mr. Dion's mother, Denyse, was a real-estate agent. Born in Paris, she gave her children their dual citizenship; Léon Dion would joke he was the only one in the household to be solely Canadian.
(Mr. Dion does not have a French passport and has not voted in a French election, his staff says.)
"As far as I remember, I have always had a rather willful temperament," Mr. Dion once said in a speech.
Thanks buddy,
Jeff
The chicken or the egg
Political communications and spin can sometimes be a headache-inducing exercise as you try to follow twists and turns in logic. Take this story from the Hill Times. It's about the Conservatives holding a $1,000 "leader's circle" reception before their new campaign finance law take affect limiting annual donations to $1000.
The Leader's Circle is the Conservative version of the LPC's Laurier Club, which Conservative MPs, bloggers and pundits regularly and routinely rail against.
Both organizations are perfectly kosher under current rules. With the Cons having railed against the Liberals on this though, and promising to "do politics differently" in the last election, how do you spin the do as I say, not as I do contradiction? Enter Tim Powers.
But Tim Powers, a Conservative strategist, turned it around and accused the Liberals of having a double standard for criticizing the Conservatives. He argued that the Liberals have been raising money through the Laurier Club for years and "it's a little rich" for them now to criticize the Tories.
"Whether it's the ethical issues or the fundraising, the Liberal Party is in no position to criticize anyone about how they choose or not choose to fundraise. The Conservative Party is the most successful individual fundraising machine and raises far more money from average Canadians and people in the grassroots than the NDP does, and it's also much more responsive to including the grassroots arguably than the NDP does. So, again when you look at the whole package, you see the Conservative strength has always come from people who donate under a $100 as opposed to those who donate over it, so, it's certainly a very inclusive organization," said Mr. Powers.
So, Tim is saying we can't criticize them for doing what they criticized us for doing because we also do what they're doing, but still criticized us for doing. Ouch, pass the acetaminophen.
But there's just one problem Tim. The NDP is giving you a hard time, sure, when they're not talking about big asses or acting like them. But, as a Liberal, I don't care about your little fundraising receptions. Have fun. If it's kosher under the current system then go for it.
Where I would criticize you is on the hypocrisy. You guys routinely criticize us for doing something that you're doing too. You ran a campaign on this, on doing politics differently. It's hypocritical, and a double standard. That's where criticism is fair, and warranted.
This do as I say, not as I do philosophy of politics has been a staple of the Harper government, from the day John Reynolds infamously reminded us that "campaigns are campaigns." Appointing unelected Senators to cabinet, staff becoming lobbyists, a lobbyist as defence minister, the list goes on.
Don't think that Canadians aren't paying attention, Tim. Clearly doing politics differently is out as a theme next campaign. I look forward to seeing what they come up with instead.
Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers
From the department of whhhhhaaaaa?
OK, so it works better when Jon Stewart does it, but still.
Attacking Stephane Dion on his commitment to Canada? The guy that, if Canadians know of him, it's as the letter writing, separatist fighting, clarity act championing unity minister? That’s an interesting one Ezra, good luck.
Watch for future columns from Mr. Levant on how Kermit just isn’t green enough and how Bob and Doug McKenzie don’t drink enough beer.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
We still need one member, one vote
I’m sitting by the gate at the airport in Las Vegas, waiting to finally head back to Toronto after a wild and crazy week in Montreal, and then Sin City. Seems my luck has run out; I head back down $60 at the roulette tables. So much for early retirement.
As we come down though from our post convention euphoria, I hope we will continue to keep alive the need for moving to a (weighted) one member, one vote method of leadership selection. I know it may seem counter-intuitive, coming-off the week we just had. This week was everything you want a delegated convention to be. A wide-open field, colourful displays of passion and emotion, multiple dramatic ballots, and an improbable come from behind victory. Not to mention reams and reams of positive media coverage, and a nice post-convention bump in the polls.
That still doesn’t change the fact though that the decision by delegates Thursday to reject OMOV by a narrow 319-299 vote was the wrong decision. Delegated conventions are a fundamentally undemocratic system that disenfranchises the majority of rank and file LPC members.
And I say that knowing that, under an OMOV system, my guy might not have won. I think he might still well have; his strong second-choice support could have carried the day under that system as well. The emotion of the convention though, the move to green, the momentum that built throughout, the dramatic endorsements by Martha and Gerard, those all played a key role as well.
It was an experience that those that were there will never forget, but that’s just the point. Those that were there. At nearly $2500 in fees and expenses the cost is still out of reach to average party members, even more so under the new fundraising rules. Therefore, only those with a certain level of discretionary income are able to select our leader. That’s not very Liberal. Find a way to make the convention more affordable and I might be swayed a bit, but serious issues still remain.
Party members vote for delegates, who are pledged to a particular candidate on the first ballot. I was interested to learn for the first round ballots are pre-checked for the candidate, so they need to either vote for that person as pledges, or pocket it. After the first ballot though the delegate is a free-agent, and the voices of those that elected them are no longer heard. They should not be disenfranchised.
Talking to people at the convention, I got the sense that OMOV was rejected because they felt the whole process of proposing the change was rushed and they wanted more information and debate. I can respect that.
The next step moving forward now should be to have that debate, right down to the riding level. And, at a future date, every party member should vote on the issue in a party-wide referendum. Combine it with delegate selection to the next biennial in two years time to simplify things. It’s fundamentally unfair to leave such a decision to delegates to a leadership convention; those that can afford to go are less likely to object to the present system.
We have lots of time for a full and healthy debate though. I don’t think we’ll be in another leadership race for a long, long time. :)
Convention photos on flickr
I've uploaded my convention photos on flickr, including some I didn't post on the blog over the week.
Also, quoted briefly in this Toronto Star story on blogging the convention. I knew right away when I used the word risky I might have overstated it a bit. I think gamble might have been a better word to choose. I think I also added that those that don't at least make an effort at fair and balanced-ish tend not to have much credibility. Still, good story.
Monday, December 04, 2006
A day later
Some 24 hours after the leadership race ended with an improbable Stephane Dion victory, and after four days of living, eating and breathing politics and the leadership nearly 24x7 it’s jolting to the system to be here in Las Vegas now, seemingly a world away.
The result did merit a 10 second clip in CNN though, so it wasn’t all just some crazy dream. Still, getting my head back into work mode is proving challenging. And missing the first question period Monday led by our new leader of the opposition, backed by our Liberal dream team, is really tough. It will be a sight to see.
A lot of good news on Sunday too. It seems Michael and Bob will both be running again, and that is great news. Both bring so much to the team, and together we are greater than the sum of our parts. While we’ve always know he was a savvy politician, Bob proved himself a class act with the way he dropped off the ballot Saturday night. It was a decision that shows he really is committed to growing the Liberal Party. And Michael. Classy isn’t strong enough to describe how he comported himself Saturday night. To take the hits he has taken, to have come so close, and yet, to be such a statesman…this was a Michael Ignatieff I hadn’t seen before.
And Gerard, Ken, Scott, Martha…remember when they called this a field of also-rans, of nobodies? Lamented the lack of big names? Not any longer. This is a dream team, and I can just picture them fanning-out across the country in the next campaign. We're going to need everyone, a united party, and I really feel the family coming together. Raw emotions will heal in time.
Speaking of the next campaign, positive polling numbers out today it seems. It’s no surprise, a post-convention bump is to be expected. Don’t read too much into this. What it does say though is that we’re starting from a good base. As Liberals got to know Stephane he grew on them, and I’m confident that Canadians will too.
It’s too early for me to look to seriously at the next campaign. While I very much like our chances, I know it will be a real battle. For now, I’ll just say let the NDP and Cons blow hot air, and let the pundits continue with their record of accuracy. Let them keep underestimating us. In the mean time, we’ve got work to do.
Sunday, December 03, 2006
A Perfect Storm
In a few hours I’m heading to the airport to catch a plane to fly to a (far less) exciting conference in Las Vegas. And I’m thinking I need to hit the roulette tables.
Principles before winnability
Tonight, I’m reminded of the end of January, and the aftermath of the last election. Long ago I had grown disillusioned with the Liberal Party, and more than once I had considered walking away. I’d experienced firsthand how we had become a party that valued power over principle, and I just didn’t feel comfortable here anymore.
After the military ad surfaced during the election campaign the Liberal Party lost my vote. Enough was enough. I still believed in the principles of the Liberal Party. I still felt them deeply in my core. But those principles were no longer much in evidence in the LPC.
With the election defeat and Paul Martin’s resignation my thoughts turned to the future, and whom the next leader would be. The usual names were bandied about in the press: Manley, Rock, McKenna, Stronach and others. None inspired me. None, I felt, represented the renewal the Liberal Party needed. The honesty, the integrity. The principles.
But who?
The day after the election I asked, Why not Stephane Dion? Here was a guy that had stared down the separatists and won. A guy that even those who disagree with him don’t question his honesty and integrity. Smart. Compassionate. But could he transition from Lieutenant to leader? An open question. Could he win the leadership? Very highly unlikely, but he’s somebody that should be in the race. The wouldn’t it be nice if but it ain’t ever gonna happen guy.
Fast-forward and Dion has thrown his hat into the leadership race and, while he’s picking up steam, still isn’t given much of a chance. Michael is the clear frontrunner, Bob is building steam. At the LPC(O) convention in May I listen to the candidates speak and I talk to old friends, and try to decide whom to support.
For me, it came down to Stephane and Ken Dryden. Two candidates that embody the principles of Liberalism I felt had gone missing in the modern Liberal Party. Listening to Ken, both at that convention and scrumming at the King Edward Accord, it was so clear that he gets it. When he speaks, you can feel the honesty and the conviction in his voice. And, so rare for politicians, he thinks about the question, and he actually answers it. He couldn’t spin if he tried, and if he could he wouldn’t.
I sat down in the lobby of that Shearton for 30 minutes in the evening as the hospitality suites opened-up. I wanted to make a decision before I went up so I could put on a button (as an aside, never did get my hands on a button until I got to Montreal:)). It was tough, but after going back and forth, and back and forth, in the end I had to give a slight edge to Stephen.
This decision wasn’t about winnability for me. If I wanted to pick the winning horse I’d have gone for Ignatieff. I wasn’t concerned about who had the best chance of winning, and Stephane wasn’t given much of a chance at all. But I wanted to stand behind a candidate that I believed in, a candidate that I could be proud of. Someone I could respect, could honestly defend, and someone I could respect myself for supporting. Someone I wouldn’t have to apologize for, or make excuses for. That someone was Stephane.
No one got involved in this campaign because they wanted to back the winning horse. If they did you’d have to question their judgment, brilliant in hindsight though it may look. They got involved because this was the horse they wanted to win.
Did I think we’d be here in January, in May, or even on Tuesday? In all honesty, not really. I was optimistic, but realistic too. When asked, I said he was a real long shot, but a long shot with a real shot. There was a scenario I would paint, but a lot had to fall into place for it to happen. Up the middle. Compromise candidate. Almost frighteningly, it did.
On to Montreal
Things really began to change though when I arrived in Montreal. We were in fourth place, though not by much, and we had to get past Gerard to have a shot. In the aftermath of the nation question, it wasn’t clear how that would help or hinder. It wasn’t looking good though.
But despite being the fourth place camp, stepping into the Palis des Congres on Wednesday the Dion supporters were one of the most visible and vocal groups at the convention. They were loud, proud, enthusiastic, and everywhere, looking larger than their numbers. They were visible. If you judged just by supporter visibility you’d agree with the media that this was a two-person race, although you’d say Ignatieff and Dion. It was a ground war now and we were fighting hard. With a lot of support in the Montreal area the Dion camp got a lot of their supporters out early, and, while the other camps would also later build their turnout, the momentum had begun.
On Friday night it was the speeches. I’d written earlier that Stephane needed a “Santos moment” and while I don’t think he had one, I was generally pleased with his speech. The reaction from those I talked to in the hall though was mixed, and the media pundits weren’t kind. The key opponent right now though is Gerard, and the verdict on his speech was similar. I liked it, he was a lot better than the Gerard I saw in May at the Sheraton. But no home run. First ballot results will tell the tale.
Two votes. That’s how far ahead Stephane moves ahead of Gerard on that first ballot. Just think about that. If Kennedy’s team had gotten just three more people out he would have stayed in third, and who knows how things would have played-out. The symbolism of being in third place, even if only by the thinnest of margins, is substantial. It’s the big mo. And Earth shattering is Michael coming in under the symbolic 30 per cent mark. In reality, he was still in pretty decent position, even with the limits in his growth potential. But his camp had been spinning the hall to expect 35 per cent, and they’d raised expectations. To fail so spectacularly in meeting them was a body blow they were very unlikely to recover from. Not only was Michael beatable for the first time, his defeat seemed inevitable. It was just a matter of time, and by whom.
On to the second ballot, and despite our symbolically important third place position, I was nervous. It wouldn’t take much for Gerard to pass us again and if he opened-up a gap it would be over. But we started the morning off with a real coup, with Martha-Hall Findlay joining Stephane for a ride on the red bus and a flash mob through the convention hall. It was the biggest mob of the convention to date, sporting flashy new green swag with Dion at the front, arm in arm with MHF, the candidate everyone in the hall respects and loves, and who everyone had just seen give the speech of her life the night before. We’re joined by former Ignatieff supporters, and many Brison supporters as well. Momentum keeps building.
The second ballot results are in and Ignatieff still doesn’t get to the 35 per cent he wanted on the first ballot. More wind out of the sails, and with Volpe and Brison already having gone to Rae and Dryden now heading over, Rae’s star appears to be on the rise. Further down the ballot Dion now has a strong hold on third place, some 90 votes over Gerard. While he could stay on another ballot, Kennedy recognizes the writing on the wall and makes the decision he thinks is best for the party, and the renewal platform he has championed, and moves to Dion. Granted, a Dion leadership is the best scenario for Gerard politically as well, but to endorse the third place candidate, and at a time when Rae’s star appears to be on the rise, takes guts. It would have been easy for him to go to Bob. But it wouldn’t have been Gerard.
Here’s where the green swag is huge, and I’m told this was the strategy behind the colour change. Kennedy is trying to deliver his delegates to Dion, but Rae and Ignatieff are trying to poach them. Some do go to Iggy. But Iggy has red scarfs, and Kennedy had red scarfs. They blend. You can’t really tell they’ve crossed to Ignatieff. But the green on red, wow, that stands out. That you can see from a ways away, and so can all the other delegates deciding where to go. The train is moving and you need to hop on. On the floor Iggy supporters are disillusioned, Rae supporters nervous, and Dion supporters riding high. Momentum.
Third ballot results and Gerard has delivered an amazing chunk of his delegates, beyond the most optimistic expectations. Dion leapfrogs the field for first place, and a stunned Rae is dropped from the ballot. That’s momentum on steroids. The worst case scenario is running through my head now though. We’ve been hearing rumours for hours of high level talks between the Ignatieff and Rae camps. The lower is supposed to come to the higher. If Rae goes to his college roommate and brings the bulk of his delegates with him, we’re probably done.
It was amazing how it unfolded though. First, it becomes clear Rae was releasing his delegates. This is huge for the Dion camp, as left free I’m confident his delegates will break to us. If Rae still joins the Ignatieff box however, enough of them might follow him to make this a real nail biter. Amazingly, though, Rae announces he’s “keeping his own counsel” and won’t be saying how he’ll be voting. At this point, Dion has it all but won. The Rae delegates are worked hard, but it seems pretty clear that, with less growth needed to get over 50 + 1, Dion should have it.
While still refusing to let myself believe it, for the first time as I stand in the hall awaiting the results I actually allow myself to consider Dion could win this thing and, having come so close, how devastated I’ll be now if he doesn’t.
When the much delayed results come out and he actually has, it’s beyond belief.
A leader
I feel like my faith in the Liberal Party has been renewed tonight. The grassroots have spoken here in Montreal. We sent a message to the party establishment. And it’s not just Stepane. It’s Gerard and it’s Martha too. The candidates of renewal, of integrity, of principle.
We said we don’t care what the media spin is, or whom this Senator or that former cabinet minister thinks is the most winnable. We care about substance. We care about ideas. It’s about renewal. Finally, again, it is about ideas, and it is about principle. The grassroots have sent the backroom boys a message tonight: we’re taking back the Liberal Party. Get on board or get out of the way.
I would have gotten behind Michael or Bob, and I would have been proud to get behind Gerard Kennedy. But this is something I could never have imagined, even last week. My faith has been restored. I am proud to be a Liberal again. In fact, I’ve never been prouder. I can't wait for the fights ahead.
Bring it on.
Thank-you
Thank-you to everyone who has visited this corner over the past week, I appreciate your encouragement and support. Thank-you also to everyone I’ve met here in Montreal, both in the blog room and on the convention floor. It has been an amazing experience. And a very big thank-you to Tait Simpson of the LPC for taking a risk and inviting bloggers into the process. I think his experiment has proved a resounding success and points the way to the future.
LPC Day Four (evening) in photos
Former PM John Turner warms the crowd with a passionate plea for party renewal.
Jean has still got it. Big love for the little guy in the hall tonight.
One word: Kennedion.
Victory, wow!
The Dion party at the Place D'Armes is overflowing down the halls and onto the street.
Leaving the party, Stephane is mobbed by well wishers, heading off for some well deserved rest after an amazing, historic day.Saturday, December 02, 2006
On cloud nine
I’m too pumped to speak objectively about Stephane’s speech. No matter what he said I would have thought it was great just to see him up there giving it.
I liked though how he paid tribute to all the other candidates, it was really classy. Such love in the hall for Martha, and especially for Gerard Kennedy. Dion won the convention but Kennedy is a real winner too. The timing of his move to Dion, the way he delivered. This guy is the next leader.
Looking behind Stephane as he spoke you could see a real expression of pride on Jean Chretien’s face, it was great to see.
As I said it was tough to follow the speech objectively at this point with all the emotions flowing, but some lines I liked:
“What started as a network of loyal supporters around me became a movement.”
“When we Liberals address the concerns of Canadians we Liberals are an unstoppable force.”
There are a lot of really disappointed Ignatieff supporters out there right now, especially those from Quebec. Emotions are very raw right now, and you have to feel for them. I think we will come together, and to those in Quebec especially, I ask you to give Stephane a chance. I think he’s going to surprise you.
I’ll compose my thoughts and have more to say tomorrow. For now, it’s time to party!
comon
They come on stage and its for crowd control? Holy letdown Batman!
Huge ovation for Dion.
Crowd is restless but pumped, at least here deep in Dionista territory.
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersJean! Jean! Jean!
Lots of love in the hall for Jean Chretien. It really feels like we are renewing and coming together. Huge applause on the no Iraq war line and harper and bush. Awesome. Jean rocks
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersPMs and leaders
On the floor and John Turner is speaking about party renewal. Looks like they'll bring out Chretien and Martin next to all intro the new leader in an awesome display of party unity. Excellent.
Great atmosphere in the hall.
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersPhotos from the floor before ballot four
Nervous anticipation mixed with a tingly feeling, nervousness, so many emotions right now I'm not sure how coherent I can be.
Just popped down for a walk around the hall, and I'll be in the hall for the final ballot results. Won't be able to bring the laptop down, so I'll have some immediate reaction by Treo and more later on when I can get back online.
The mood on the floor? Crazy. Anything can happen but the mood, in my biased view, is for Dion. Everyone is busy wooing the Rae people, all the heavy hitters are pressing the flesh. The halls are packed and it's hard to move.
Here's a taste:
Nearly all these people are waiting to vote. It's wall to wall, no room to breathe.
The head of the line where it enters the voting hall, where one more ballot will be cast.
A very happy Stephane Dion makes his way into the voting hall.
Gerard Kennedy is on the floor working to bring people over to Dion.
Gerard Kennedy and Ujal Dosanjh try to get the Rae people over to Stephane.Forgive my profanity but hell yes!!
The third ballot results are in and Stephane has leapfrogged BOTH Iggy and Rae to move into first place, with 37 per cent of the vote. Do you believe in miracles?
Gerard Kennedy delivered in a really big way. Here’s the stats:
Dion: 1782 votes 37 per cent
Ignatieff: 1616 votes 34.5 per cent
Rae: 1375 votes 28.5 per cent
Spoiled: 6 votes
Total cast: 4823
Needed to win: 2410
So Rae is done and it’s Dion and Ignatieff on the final ballot. It’s looking that while Rae might go over to Iggy he is releasing his supporters to go where they wish. That is really, really huge. Correction, Rae is staying neutal. This is even more huge, I am positively over the moon.
Look at the numbers. Iggy’s people were spinning 35 per cent on the first ballot for their guy, and after three ballots they STILL aren’t there. You can’t spin that away. Look at the growth. Michael picked-up 135 votes, while Dion grew by an earth shattering 642 votes. Look at the momentum: Dion.
Now the question is where do Rae’s people go. I have to think they break for Dion; the ideological gulf to bridge between Iggy and Rae is just too wide. I’m slightly delirious at the moment, I need to go down to the floor and soak up the atmosphere. It will be Treo-blogging from the floor with the results, and either way it's sure to be pandemonium.
What a day!
It’s easy being green
I’ve been walking around the hall as the delegates line-up to vote for the third ballot. The atmosphere is intense as people decide where they’re going to go, and people from all the camps trying to woo them.
I’m seeing a lot of exuberant and smiling Dion supporters, a lot of disillusioned Ignatieff supporters and a lot of very, very nervous Rae supporters.
Ignatieff supporters are walking around with Kennedy and Ignatieff signs, but from what I’m hearing and seeing the bulk of Kennedy’s supporters are coming to the Dion camp. The tale is in the swag. I’m seeing a lot of people sporting Dion and Kennedy swag, a lot, but very few wearing Kennedy and Rae or Iggy swag. There was a mob at the Dion table for Dion shirts, scarfs and buttons. Not near as much activity at the others.
And here’s where the Dion camp’s move to green swag this morning is freakin brilliant. Everybody else’s swag is red, so they don’t contrast when you get two camp’s red swag together. But Dion’s green swag contrasts so well with the red scarfs of Kennedy and the others, that you can spot the converts from a mile away.
That is so significant because of, again, momentum. The other delegates see all the people sporting green and red and it shows where the momentum is going, they see where the train is going and they’ll want to hop on board.
Any of the three can still take this thing, but I still feel very, very good about our chances here. Could you have imagined this back in February?
Welcome Gerard!
The third ballot has been set, it will be Ignatieff, Rae and Dion. Gerard Kennedy has crossed over to the Stephane Dion camp! Wow!!
Hopefully my exuberance isn't too irrational. This is still very, very much up in the air. But we could not be better positioned. I think Gerard is going to be able to bring a huge amount of his supporters over to our camp. I've been talking about momentum, and it is sooo with us.
There are lots of anybody but Iggy people, and there are lots of anybody but Bob people. There are no anybody but Stephane people. He has always been the compromise candidate, and that's what we're seeing happen here. Straight up the middle with a bullet.
Hang on to your seats!
Second ballot: That's what I'm talking about!
The Dionistas are going crazy. It was an open question if we could stay in third, and we did it. Momentum. Michael is done and his supporters are more than welcome in the Dion camp. It’s going to be Rae vs. Dion.
Stephane made a big move on this ballot, solidly in third now opening up an even wider gap on Kennedy. Gerard and Stephane walked into the convention hall together, I think at this point Gerard is going to have to come over to Stephane. Rae may have the big names but we’re getting the grassroots. We’ve got the big mo! Hang on to your seats!
Michael Ignatieff: 1481 votes 31.6 per cent
Bob Rae: 1132 votes 24.1 per cent
Stephane Dion: 974 votes 20.8 per cent
Gerard Kenendy: 884 votes 18.8 per cent
Ken Dryden: 219 votes 4.7 per cent
Total votes cast: 4695
Update 1: Stunned silence and disbelief as Dryden releases his candidates but moves to the Rae box. I mean, Bob Rae? A strong anybody but Rae building here. Now the focus is on Gerard, where will he go? If he goes to Bob this is over, but I really think if he moves to Bob it will be a biiig stunner that's inconsistent with what he's been all about this campaign. As I predicted after superweekend, Gerard is the kingmaker.
Update 2: Copies of the book "Rae Days" are mysteriously appearing in the washrooms of the convention centre.
Bloggers on CTV
The full CTV piece that Rob Lurie did on bloggers is now available online. Interviewed are Antonio from Fuddle, Blogging Tory Greg Staples, and myself. I think I came off at least semi-intelligent, and I was quite amused with my hand motions.
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersBig red bus chugs to Stephane!
After very little sleep I headed down to the hall this morning and right into a green clad Stephane Dion mob waiting for Martha Hall Findlay, who has decided to endorse Dion and was on her way to the convention with Stephane on the big red bus.
This is such a huge symbolic move and is really huge for the Dion campaign. Martha is so respected by everyone in the party, she represents renewal and fresh energy, and she’s backing Dion. This is going to sway a lot of people to our side.
The Dion campaign has gone green today…green scarfs, green hats, green shirts. The hall is a sea of green. As I walked into the hall I was handed a green scarf and a Martha sign and drafted into the mob waiting for Stephane and Martha to arrive. A group of us were herded outside (dammed chilly this morning) to wait for the bus, and following a scum with
the media we followed them inside with the biggest mob of the convention so far, red and green everywhere, as we followed them into the hall for voting.
It’s not just the Martha people coming over to Stephane. I’ve talked to a number of Ignatieff people that are coming to Stephane on the second ballot. And while Scott Brison may have gone to Rae he has released his delegates and we’re picking up a lot of then, including a good friend of mine from my old riding in British Columbia.
It’s the morning after and the Dionistas are still pumped. Second ballot voting is going on now. This ballot will be crucial, this is still really up in the air.
LPC Day Three in photos
How I'm greeted each morning outside my hotel room door. I've detected a strong and noticeable bias in the Ignatieff Daily, I'm tempted to write a letter to the editor.
Former Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy.
Former Environment Minister David Anderson is interviewed by CPAC's Martin Stringer.
My journey inside a spontaneous flash mob. We're spontaneously forming and getting our spontaneous cheers down and our signs spontaneously positioned.
Sign in hand I'm ready for some spontaneous production of television b-roll footage.
A successful spontaneous flash mob comes together, as we chant, wave our signs and follow Stephane through the convention centre.
The first anti-Harper signs at the convention make an appearance in an Ignatieff spontaneous flash mob.
The lines to vote were very, very long, and signs had to be surrendered before entering the room. Note the now infamous orange Bob Rae signs.
Warren looks so lonely, I really should have gone up and said hello.
When the CBC's At Issue panel is on, all other activity stops at blogger central. At least when Coyne is on, Chantal Hebert isn't to popular with the Dionistas these days.
The little red bus that could, and it sure did.First round results are out....
The first round results have been posted on the Liberal Web site, and with CPAC filming the scene in the blogger batcave. And as we saw the results on the screen...stunned silence was the reaction. Wow.
The top four:
Michael Ignatieff 29 per cent
Bob Rae 20 per cent
Stephane Dion 17.8 per cent
Gerard Kennedy 17.7 per cent
Everyone is just stunned. Iggy at less than 30 per cent is a death knell for the Ignatieff campaign. They've been spinning 32 to 35 per cent. The symbolism of his being at less than 30 per cent is huge. I think Ignatieff's days are numbered. With the buzz around the convention being that Michael has very, very little second choice support I don't see how he can get to 50 per cent plus one. Wow.
Rae at 20 per cent, but Stephane and Gerard not far behind mean the candidate that will be going up against Iggy is still very much in the air. Rae getting Volpe will give him a bump, but the second ballot is going to be very, very interesting.
Stephane in third place, even if only by a scant four votes, wow! Yess!! Lots of happy Dion supporters here right now. Gerard's people had been spinning they'd be in third with a comfortable margin, this has to be very demoralizing for them tonight. Second ballot will tell the tale as this is far from over, but with these results, the Allan Rock endorsement and a great speech tonight, I am a very optimistic, enthusiastic and happy Dionista tonight!
Friday, December 01, 2006
Waiting on results…and pizza
The blogger room is still busy and buzzing waiting for the first ballot results which we hope are some 30 minutes away. And we’re waiting for pizza, no one has eaten for hours and hours and nothing is open nearby the convention hall. We’ve ordered out to Domino’s…the bloggers are hungry.
Ken Rockburn and the gang from CPAC have been hanging-out in the blogger batcave tonight. They filmed a debate talking about the speeches amongst the bloggers that we’re told will be airing Dec. 10. They’re also waiting with us for the first ballot results, they’re going to film our reactions.
One interesting trend that seems to have emerged is the different impressions of the speeches from those that were in the hall and those that watched on tv to the Rae Jam. Those in the hall seemed to think Rae nailed it, while those that watched it on TV think he bombed. While it’s an interesting dichotomy it’s those in the hall that get to vote, and bottom line that’s all that matters at this point.
There’s a lot of nervousness in the room as we wait for the results. Everyone seems to be a touch nervous about the performance of their respective candidates. I won’t name any names to protect the innocent, but some of our Ignatieff people seem to think while they’re happy with his performance he didn’t nail it, and with some of the movements they think Rae may end up taking it. As a Dion supporter, I thought he gave a good speech, not the home run changes the dynamic speech, but I really liked it. There wasn’t a lot of buzz in the hall though, and the media spin I’ve seen in the hall hasn’t been overly positive, so I don’t know. Haven’t seen a lot of Kennedy people in these parts, but from the supporters of others I’ve talked to reaction to his speech has been mixed.
Quoted on CTV’s Web site in a story about blogging the convention.
Still waiting for results…and pizza…sooo hungry.
Liveblogging from the floor: Night three and candidate speeches
*Refresh this post for updates throughout the evening program.
4:49 PM: Change in heart, I’m coming down to the hall now after all. Just too much buzz and excitement to be watching this upstairs on TV. So, I’ll be cut off from the latest TV gossip but reporting my impressions from the convention floor. Updates won’t be as frequent tonight as past live blogs, instead I’ll update after each speaker with my thoughts and impressions of their performance.
On the way down to the hall it was chaos, thousands and thousands are still waiting in the lines to cast their first ballot votes. It’s going to take awhile, the line was not moving that fast. Michael’s people were giving out chocolate bars on the way into the hall, that’s going to be dinner.
My usual blogging spot has been taken over by the broadcast media so I’m actually typing on my lap and running on battery. Hopefully it holds, I’m told my spot should be free after the dinner-hour newscasts are wrapped.
Martha-Hall Findlay is up on stage now, each candidate has 25 minutes, including videos and floor demos. Back soon.
5:20 PM: A really great speech from MHF. I haven’t really heard her give a speech before. I’ve seen her in all candidates debates, sure, but that’s very much a different thing. Speeches are different, and she can really give a heckuva speech. It’s no newsflash, but she’s a comer. Definite cabinet material, and a real shot at the leadership next time. So much respect and affection for her in the hall here. She just needs some experience before she can be a national party leader or a Prime Minister. Next time.
After the video her song as she came out was “Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow”, long a staple song of political events. As she begins her speech after a bow and a standing-o from everyone in the hall, the French sounds great to me. It’s a nice touch too when she asks her Mom, who was here tonight, to take a bow.
I liked her message. She said the goal she set at the beginning of the campaign to have a strong female voice at the table in Montreal has been met, they’ve made it here. But just getting here, she said, is not enough. She references Nancy Pelosi, the first demale Democratic speaker in the U.S., who said we’ve made history, now we need to make progress. Sheila Copps made history, says MHF, now she’s here to make progress.
I also liked how she said we need to be proud of being Liberals again and moreover, we need to govern by principles, not by polls. Leadership isn’t control or clever tactics, it’s the ability to inspire.
Some quotes:
We need brains, heart and guts, and I have all three!
If I were to become leader of this great party Stephen Harper wouldn’t know what hit him!
Vive la Parti Liberal. Vive la Canada! Merci beaucoup!
Scott Brison is up.
5:45 PM: Scott eschews the intro video for a brief introduction before he takes to the podium. A solid speech from Scott, he’s a veteran politician and you may recall he has a bit of experience giving leadership convention speeches.
He may be a former Tory but he’s really strong on social issues and that came through in his speech tonight. He talked about how we need to be nation builders, how we need to defend the charter, about the importance of equalization, and about how we need to help Canada’s working poor with an earned income tax credit.
Great line from Scott:
“Liberals will always give you a fight when you attack charter rights.”
They run a video partway through his speech, and it’s a bit odd. It seems to be focused on climate change and global warming, attacking the Conservative record the environment with the feel of an attack ad frankly. The applause from the audience is strong though as the video ends and it’s back to Scott at the podium, who takes the fight to Stephen Harper now on environmental policy.
He has a message for Stephen Harper:
“It’s the green economy, stupid!"
It’s interesting, I knew this was an important issue for Scott but he’s really dedicating a lot of his speech to it. I have to think this is going to heavily influence whom he supports when he drops out. He also calls for personal and corporate tax cuts.
“A vote for me on the first ballot is a vote for the vision I have described, no matter who wins this leadership race.”
Nice job by Scott who leaves the stage to, naturally, Celtic music.
6:02 PM: I'm back up in the blogger batcave, no space to blog downstairs. Joe Volpe is speaking. I'll be back for the next speaker.
6:56 PM:I’m back and it’s Ken Dryden time. To the strains of Cold Play it’s video time. You know, there was a time the Dryden campaign wasn’t pushing his hockey background to promote his candidacy. That time is sooooo over. The hockey clips and quotes are heavy in the video.
The applause is sustained and strong as Ken takes to the podium to the loudest ovation of the night so far. You can tell Ken is passionate, and he feels and cares deeply about what he’s saying. He’s not as wooden as he once seemed, he has gotten better over the campaign.
I’ve always liked Ken, he’s so genuine, so honest and so ethical. Back in May, at the LPC(O) convention, I sat in the lobby for 30 minutes trying to decide between Ken and Stephane. In the end, I felt Ken just couldn’t emote, he couldn’t play on TV. He has come a long ways in a few short months.
Great line from Ken, from when he was outside Vancouver’s safe injection site. Some patrons recognize him and say:
“Hey Ken Dryden, he shoots he scores!”
This one goes over great in the blog room:
“History is a long time.”
Ken talked for awhile about his experiences on the campaign trail that was quite a mélange of remembering. He hits on a lot of the good Liberal ideals and values. Then he goes after the Conservatives, and questions if they really like this Canada. Playing to the audience here, it’s a simplistic argument and Ken is faaaar too intelligent a man to really believe that. His point though is to emphasize differences between Liberal and Conservative values, and that’s bang-on.
Ken gets cutoff before he's done, he was out of time. Now, it's Stephane!
7:02 PM: It's confirmed now that Allan Rock has endorsed Stephane Dion. That's a huge pickup for Stephane, big momentum move. Also, there's video up on CTV Newsnet with Rob Lurie talking about bloggers at the convention. No interviews in this piece, but video from inside the blogger batcave.
7:06 PM: We've got Newsworld on, is it just me or does John Manley really not care for Stephane?
Anyway, we're fully liveblogging again because this is my guy, and it's my blog. :) Glen Pearson, the newest Liberal MP-elect from London North-Centre, is on the stage to introduce Stephane. He talks about his respect for Elizabeth May, and the importance of the environmental issue. He said with May finishing second, that's a message on the importance of the environment that Liberals have to take note of. He's clearly making nice to green voters here, and moreover building the case of the environment as a big issue, and therefore, the man to fight an election on that is, naturally, the guy that has made it the centrepiece of his campaign, Stephane Dion.
Back after his speech.
7:35 PM: Stephane looks great, passionate, honest and real. The French is perfect…and the English is pretty darned good too. A little grammar slip here and there, but anyone who would take issue with that is just looking for something to attack him with. Dion nailed it with a great speech.
He talked about the clarity act and standing-up for Canada, to great applause. In a nod to party unity he points out that, for both Jean Chretien and Paul Martin:
“I delivered for my PM, for my party, for my country!”
He goes after Harper now, these Conservatives are more like the Republicans than Red Tories.
“Canada has a PM that thinks the U.S. is not only our ally, but our model.”
“There’s more culture in a bowl of yogurt than in the entire Conservative government.”
He really went after Harper hard, and it hit home. Clearly he’s trying to show the delegates that he can be the leader, that he can run against Harper, and run hard. He needs to look Prime Ministerial, and he does.
Half way through the speech he turns to the environment and stays with it for awhile. He’s really getting detailed in talking about policy around the environment, and I like that idea. He’s not just an empty hat, he’s saying, he’s a man with ideas, he’s more than just the talking points provided by his staff.
“It will be good for your wallet, and good for the country.”
“The world needs Canada. And under my leadership, Canada will not fail the world.”
Stephane says it won’t be enough to just oppose Harper in the next election, and this is a very correct message he has been talking about since day one. We need to present a vision to Canada, he says, and this is where his three pillars come in: social welfare, economic responsibility, and the environment. This is a message that resonates so well not only with Liberals, but with Canadians.
“The world needs Canada, and under my leadership Canada will not fail the world.”
Stephane got cutoff just before he was due to end, but I thought he nailed the speech. He did what he had to do tonight, and the hall was with him. Not only did he show the most substance, but he showed he has the chops to take on Harper. I think this is going to move some votes. Great job Stephane!
Next up is Gerard.
8:06 PM: Justin Trudeau is out to introduce Gerard, of course. I hear he and Gerard have been joined at the hip over the course of the week here. It takes Gerard a long time to get to the podium after Justin’s intro, interesting choice.
Gerard talks a lot about Canadian unity, not in the separatism sense but in terms of bringing Canada together. He got into the race, he said, because he was worried about Canada being divided, by challenges like an ageing population.
A big party of his speech was about party renewal, and Gerard actually released a platform on renewal this afternoon. Gerard says we don’t just need a new leader and a new slogan. We need to win the next election in the right way, and for the right reasons. A new Liberalism.
He touches on Afghanistan, and says we’ll only stay if the mission promotes Canada’s principals.
“If Canadian troops are to be put into harm’s way it must be for Canadian principles that we believe in.”
I was surprised when he mentioned Stephane Dion in the speech, thanking him for his work on the environmental file. Very interesting that he chose to mention another candidate, and that it was Stephane.
Gerard is the first candidate to mention the nation, saying on the doorsteps in the last campaign it wasn’t nation, it was integrity. We’ll win back Quebec, he said, when our house is back in order. He’d be proud to be the first PM born and raised in Western Canada. And he mentions the foodbank, of course.
He’s about bringing people together, and he says it’s time. He times it well, doesn’t get cutoff.
It was an interesting speech from Gerard. He gives a good speech, passionate, compassionate, emotional. The first half I was worried he was too heavy on the platitudes and too little on the meat, but while he didn’t go as meaty as Stephane he did have a lot more specifics and substance later in the speech, I thought.
Will it be enough for Gerard to stay in third? Tough to say. But I will say that I can get behind Gerard if he becomes leader, and I’d be proud. He’s still firmly my second choice. Nice job Gerard!
8:32 PM: Bob Rae’s time begins with a video. He has gotten a lot of endorsements, and every one of them is featured in the video. Ready to lead now…ready…now ready now…ready….now….he’s ready to lead now, is the message I think.
And heeeeeere’s Bob. It’s Bob Rae unplugged, no podium, he’s carrying a mic. No prepared speech, it’s off the cuff. Bob wants to rap about Canada, about the world…and about the planet.
It’s been a journey, Bob says, and he’s learned some lessons. Bob is telling lots of stories, dropping names of old cronies, emphasis on old. He’s trying to play himself as a Liberal, even when he wasn’t, but in the blogging room here we’re all asking where’s the substance? Where’s the beef? He hasn’t given us any substance yet. We’ve got a Kennedy supporter, a Dion support and an Iggy supporter and all agree Bob isn’t getting it done.
Mentions child care and thanks Ken Dryden. Fiscal responsibility is the means that allows us to do other things. Social justice. Now he’s mentioning Brison and Dryden, and talking about the importance of going green and the environment. Clearly, he’s trying to reach out to the delegates of the other candidates.
It’s the classic frontrunner approach. Give the broad brushstrokes and the high-level feel-good stuff, but no specifics. A strong, strong contrast between the speeches by Stephane and Gerard. Didn’t score with me.
9:08 PM: Michael Ignatieff starts with a video too, littered with endorsement clips and shots of Michael walking on the beach looking, I guess, Prime Ministerial. And waving his hands and stuff. All the people seem to like him a lot. Contrasted to Rae’s endorsement clips Michael’s include a lot more youth, that’s a good move. Anyway, it’s was a long video, 10 minutes or so, now it’s time for his speech.
The emphasis at the start for Michael is party renewal, and party unity. An agenda for all Canadians. We came here together to make a historic decision, he said, and we will leave here together. And in the next election, he said, we need to make it about our values, our vision for Canada.
“A Canada where hope is shared, not squandered. A Canada where promises are kept and not betrayed. A Canada that inspires.”
We built this country….we built this country on rock and roll…
After a lot of the brushstrokes and the platitudes he finally got into some issues. First issue, education, every Canadians should get to go to college or university if they have the grades. I agree fully and I’m happy to hear him say so, I’d just like a hint at how. Addressing climate change now, and what we pass on to our grandchildren. And now the First Nations, before bringing it back to values and the charter.
Took him a bit to get to Harper, but now he’s making the same values differentiation we’ve heard from nearly all the other candidates. Our differences in vision, and Canadian values. Good audience participation, getting them to shout Canada! Canada!
Just as the music is starting to play him off, Michael dials up the passion and ends with:
“Give me a chance and I will make you proud, and I will give you victory!”
He took time to build, but ended strong. I thought it was very much a frontrunners speech, not a lot of specifics, but unlike Rae it was a really good frontrunners’ speech. Good emotion, good speech. I would have like more specifics, but I thought he did a good job.
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersMedia, spin, noise and numbers
*It’s really getting loud here now, all the camps have filled the hallways and the main lobby with loud, boisterous, sign-totting supporters. It’s now one giant spontaneous flash mob. They’re going to yell themselves hoarse. Getting hard to hear myself think as I try to write something semi-coherent and intelligent sounding.
*First ballot voting was supposed to start at 3:00 pm with speeches running from 4:00 pm until 9:00 pm, but the word is a problem with the voting machines has pushed everything back by an hour. Voting should now be underway, with speeches pushed back to 5:00 pm to 10:00 pm. They were already saying after midnight for the first ballot results, now it will have to be well after 1:00 am. It’s going to be a loooong night folks.
*All kinds of numbers circulating in the hall and on the blogsphere around per centage turnouts, numbers of delegates registered, etc. Often contradictory information too. It should be noted at this point there are NO official numbers available, not that I’ve seen anyway. Different camps have numbers that they’re releasing, but you have to consider the source. Speculation and spin is fun, but ultimately fruitless at this point. We’ll get the first ballot numbers (eventually) and then we’ll know what’s what.
*The speeches will be in reverse order of votes, so Iggy will be speaking last. I’ll be heading down to the hall part way through the evening to catch the main candidates, I can’t sit in the hall for five straight hours of speeches. We’ve got tv up here in the blogger batcave. For the big guys though I want to be in the hall, you just can’t capture the spirit of the thing on TV. Besides, I could have watched it on the telly at home.
*Jean Chretien is giving a news conference now live and the bloggers are all glued to the tv. The cynical bloggers are counting the snide shots Jean is taking at Paul. He says the party is united though. He’s a cheaky one too, and funny. He’s retired, he’s happy, and he doesn’t give a shit. It's hard not to miss the old guy. Vive la Canada!
*I was interviewed this afternoon about blogging by Rob Laurie of the CTV affiliate in Montreal. If you’re in Montreal it’s supposed to be on the 6:00 pm newscast. I’m told it won’t be available online.
*Fresh rumour just into my inbox: Allan Rock is supposedly going to/has endorsed Stephane. I don't vouch at all for the credibility or accuracy of this rumour. Take it for what it's worth. CP is also running the unconfirmed reports.
*We've got three prominent Blogging Tories in the blogger batcave and their unanimous choice for whom they want to win tonight? Michael Ignatieff.
Embedded inside a flash mob
After having watched the spontaneous flash mobs of placard-toting, leather-lunged partisans follow their candidates and mug for the cameras for three days, today I decided to make like Geraldo and embed myself in a mob and report from the belly of the beast.
I heard in the blogger batcave that a spontaneous Dion flash mob was spontaneously organizing downstairs, next to the Tim Horton’s (hear that Warren, we’re Timmy’s, not Starbucks). Another Dion supporter and I hoofed it downstairs, grabbed a Dion sign (they’re double-sided now, good work peps) and joined the spontaneously gathering mob, all spontaneously waving signs.
We arranged on either side of the hall, with a path down the middle for Stephane to walk through when he spontaneously arrived. After some spontaneously coaching on our cheers, an undeclared delegate (wearing a sign saying I’m undecided, talk to me) walked through to actually spontaneous thunderous cheers from the mob.
And then, and I must say it’s a heck of a coincidence, Stephane just happens to walk in through the same door we were all gathered around. That spontaneously worked out really well. The mob went wild and as Stephane passed we followed him up the escalators into the convention hall proper, chanting, cheering and waving our signs all the way, with the media at the lead, walking backwards filming and taking photos.
I was up near the front for much of the time so I may have gotten in a pic or two, we’ll see. And it was a big crowd too. How big? I’d say at least 100,000 people. The NEW moment of the convention. Take that Iggy! :)
Having experienced a flash mob now from the inside and yelled myself hoarse, I have to say it’s a surreal experience. The blood starts to pump , the adrenaline is flowing and you feel yourself submersing in the group spirit.
I was pondering yesterday the usefulness of these roving flash mobs when for all intents and purposes the air war is over. But I think, in addition to showing to any undeclared or waverers here how you have the big mo, it’s also about pumping up your own troops, keeping them motivated and getting them excited. As I said, you kind of lose yourself in the mob.
An interesting experience indeed, and more than just a little fun. I got some good pics, I’ll add them to the post when I make it back to the hotel tonight.
Numbers
Visiting the main press room to check the press releases and learned this...
Total registered delegates and alternates, 5627.
Total others registered, that'd observers, volunteers, Laurier Club members and media...and bloggers too, 2985.
Big turnout, it's getting busy here.
Recommend this Post on Progressive BloggersIt's winter in Montreal but it’s spring in the LPC
Walking to the convention centre from the hotel this morning and the warm Montreal weather has left us. It’s not super cold, but there is a sprinkling of snow on the ground and the freezing rain has made the streets slick.
Inside the Palis des Congress however it’s springtime, with the leadership candidate speeches and first round ballot voting happening tonight. Renewal is in the air. Check back here tonight for live blogging of the speeches from the convention floor.
A few morning thoughts and notes:
*Didn’t do much partying last night. Left the convention centre and it was pouring rain, so I dropped my bags at the hotel, changed, and went over to the Dion party. Apparently they were passing out drink tickets, but I didn’t get any and after I was poured a cabernet the guy said $9. After downgrading to a $3 coke and not recognizing anyone in the room, I decided to hit the Subway for a late dinner and head back to the hotel.
*Iggy’s spontaneous, roving flash-mob (©Antonio) all just spontaneously bought whistles. Yes, whistles! Clearly, the momentum…blah blah…Michael will win….yada yada.
*This afternoon from 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm is a series of speakers on “Liberal Perspectives.” Speakers to include Belinda Stronach, Marc Garneau, Sylvie Frechette and John Duffy. No live blogging of that, I’ll try to pay attention to the TV in the blogging room and make a post if there’s anything of interest said.
*Ran across former Environment Minister David Anderson this morning, he was being interviewed by Martin Stringer from CPAC. He’s sporting a Martha Hall Findlay button. A number of ex-officios and undeclared delegates seem to be parking their support with Martha earlier, gives her a symbolic boost and it gives them a little longer to see which way the winds are blowing before parking their support with one of the top candidates.
*Lloyd Axworthy is here, no sign of a campaign button on his shirt.
*The spin and rumours abound, both in the media, on the floor and in the blogger room. Polls say the sky is blue, polls say the sky is green. It’s fun, but it’s fruitless in the end. We’ll have the first ballot results tonight, and then we’ll see what’s happening. For what it’s worth I’m feeling very confident about Stephane Dion’s chances. For a guy that’s supposed to be in fourth his supporters have been as visible and enthusiastic here as Iggy, and more than Bob and Gerard. I’m hearing from sources in multiple camps that Stephane’s delegate turnout is very high , and the buzz about his second choice support is looking true. The proof will be in the pudding tonight; until then with a rumour and $5 you can buy some poutine.
*The Conservatives have invaded the blogger bat cave, with Stephen Taylor and Greg Staples setting up shop. They’ve been nice enough not to bother us about what bad, evil people we are. :)
"He's an elfin type..."
You can rest assured when Jason returns to the blogger batcave he will be taking a great deal of ribbing for this descriptive paragraph of the Cherniakian one in the Montreal Gazette:
"An elfin type with fierce eyes, Cherniak is a strange mixture of budding authority and deep geek."
LPC Day Two in photos
Not only do the bloggers have a press pass, we have "blog access." And a secret handshake.
Conventions mean buttons, lots of buttons.
Jason Cherniak holds court at the Liblogs press conference.
The mainstream media press room is no where near as swanky as the blogger room, which I'm told we've taken to calling "The Bat Cave."
Dion silenced? Never!!
Yes Virginia, there is a Joe Volpe booth.
Sore arms abounded by the end of the constitutional plenary.
Reunited and it feels so gooooood...
At the Martin tribute, former New Brunswick Premier Frank McKenna.
At the Martin tribute, the Right Honourable John Turner.
Stephane Dion and his wife Jeanine Krieber enter the Martin tribute.
Bill Graham enters the Martin tribute.
Senator Romeo Dallaire enters for the Martin tribute.
Sheila Martin and the Right Honourable Paul Martin make their way into the hall.
The Right Honourable Paul Martin.
