Painting Quebec orange?

Interesting headline on the CP ticker:

Layton says rise of ADQ is a sign Quebecers are prepared to vote NDP

Has Jack ever looked at the ADQ's platform?

Of course, his point is that Quebecers rejected the old line parties and wanted to see something new. But "a Quebec breakthrough" for the NDP next federal election?

Hey, you've got to have faith. No one knows that better than a Liberal from rural British Columbia.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Get to work Ben Mulroney

I know you're all totally excited about the Juno awards tomorrow on CTV, and of course Ben Mulroney's always enlightening red carpet coverage.

I hope he's working hard to get the scoop though because there's only one thing Canadians really want to know Ben, and I hope you'll have the answers for us tomorrow:

How did Bev Oda get to the Junos, and who is she wearing?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Harper finds some sense

There's word tonight that the Harper government is backing off its original decision to deliberately exclude the opposition leaders from the ceremonies to commemorate the 90th Anniversary of Vimy Ridge.

Under blistering pressure for a callous and unprecedented politicization of a ceremony meant to honour the sacrifice of thousands of Canadians in the pivotal World War One battle, CanWest News is reporting the Conservatives have made an about-face tonight:

A spokesman for the prime minister said Friday evening invitations have been extended to the party whips — MPs who are responsible for ensuring MPs in each caucus attend votes and other parliamentary business.

"It’s up to each party to select who attends," spokesman Dimitri Soudas said in an e-mail.

Damage control or not, and it very clearly is, it was the right decision to make and I'm glad it was finally made. I'm glad saner heads have prevailed, at least temporarily, in the PMO.

But I have to wonder, what kind of people would even consider making the decision to politicize such a ceremony in the first place, let alone actually go through with it? What kind of person says 'hey, this would be a good idea?' Seriously?

UPDATE: In a story filed before news of the Conservative about-face, the Toronto Star reports while Harper wasn't planning on inviting the opposition leaders, he was bringing along his kids:

When Prime Minister Stephen Harper jets off to France for the 90th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge, he'll be taking his children but leaving opposition leaders behind.

The trip next weekend to the site of the famous battle will be the first foray on the international stage for Ben, 10, and Rachel, 7.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

At long last, have you left no sense of decency?

I'm floored to read this story. Flabbergasted. I mean, on what possible grounds could Stephen Harper possibly even begin to justify politicizing this event, which is meant to honour the sacrifice of thousands of Canadians, and one of the pivotal moments in the creation of the strong, vibrant, independent Canada of today?

The battle of Vimy Ridge in World War I is considered by historians as the moment Canada earned its right to call itself a nation through its valour and sacrifice. In just over a week, the Prime Minister will help unveil a new memorial at a 90th remembrance ceremony on Vimy Ridge, but as Hannah Boudreau reveals exclusively tonight, politics appears to be at play in deciding who will attend…

…None of the opposition leaders were invited, either. And it's by no means a small delegation. The list of people who did make the cut are former Governor General Adrienne Clarkson, her husband, John Ralston Saul, and Public Works minister, Michael Fortier. It's not like the Conservative government is just following tradition. To commemorate the 60th anniversary of VE Day, former Prime Minister Paul Martin included all three opposition leaders on his trip to the Netherlands…

This is simply beyond the pall. Forget mean-spiritness, or asholiness, we've come to expect that from Harper. And we're all big boys and girls, we don't mind the rough and tumble. But to play politics with an event as significant as this, with the memory of fallen Canadian soldiers…it's simply sickening.

I mean, there are times when politics should be put aside. For things that are larger. For Canada. Because it wasn't Conservatives or Liberals that gave their lives at Vimy, Mr. Harper. It was Canadians.

Harper has gone way over the line here. He should be ashamed.

Also weighing in
Cerberus: Harper again takes petty partisanship to new low
Scott's DiaTribes: Harper plays politics with patriotism
The Stormy Days of March: Harper Believes He Can Get Away with Being a Partisan Hack
A View from the Left: Harper's act of partisanship a new low
Accidental Deliberations: Simple answers to simple questions
Zap you're frozen: Friday hate
Dave @ The Galloping Beaver: The petty warrior who hides behind his shield and shows naught to his foe, for he is truly a coward
Saundrie: Since when are Canadian War Memorials partisan political tools? Answer: Now that Harper is PM
Canadian Cynic: Stephen Harper channels his inner petulant, infantile dumbass
Abandoned Stuff by Saskboy: Harper doesn’t invite opposition to Vimy Ridge 90th

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Tell me another one Johnny

Conservative campaign co-chair John Reynolds is rattling his saber, threatening an imminent election:

Meanwhile, yesterday, Conservative campaign chief John Reynolds raised eyebrows when he said the federal government could fall within the next two weeks if the Liberals were to vote against bills that aim to get tough on crime.

"If they pass it, I say it's fine," Mr. Reynolds said on CTV Newsnet's Mike Duffy Live.

"If they were to defeat it, I think you might see the Prime Minister say it's time to go to the people."

Now, would that be some of the same crime legislation that the Liberals have been offering to fast-track since last fall and renewed two weeks ago, offers that have been ignored by a Conservative government more interested in electoral posturing that actually tackling crime?

Dion said Friday a government claim of obstruction on justice bills is “one of the possible scenarios” for an election call — despite the fact the Liberals have renewed an offer made to the government last fall to fast-track half a dozen justice bills, or about half the justice legislation before Parliament, through the legislative process.

“They may find another way but I think they are trying to push us into an election,” said Dion in an interview Friday. “Otherwise, they would act with us in order to have the maximum number of bills ready right away and focus our work on the ones where we think their proposals are not helpful.

So, you were saying John? Rattle rattle.

I don't blame Reynolds though. He's probably distracted these days...

The Ontario Provincial Police are investigating a sworn affidavit claiming one of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's closest advisers was allegedly involved in a bid to buy off a candidate in Ottawa' recent municipal election.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Ending the rumours in Scarborough-Centre

I've just come from the AGM for my riding of Scarborough-Centre. There had been rumours he'd be announcing his retirement but, to put the swirling rumours to rest, incumbent John Cannis announced tonight he will indeed be running in the next election. For the Liberal Party.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Quote of the day

From Stephane Dion's speech to caucus this morning:

I gave Canada Clarity. Stephen Harper gave Canada Flaherty.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Pretend you were finance minister…

After a day yesterday distracted by blogging-related things, today I really need to get down to work. So for now I'll leave you with this quote, which Stephane Dion reportedly made in a speech to the Liberal caucus this morning, and then a question:

Pointing to the multibillion-dollar surplus, Dion declared that "never has a government done so little with so much,"…

I think this is an interesting theme worth picking-up on. If you were finance minister, what would you have done with that multi-billion dollar surplus?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Harper's master plan for a fall majority revealed

Is Steve Harper playing Alan Eagleson, trying to help get a rematch of the 72 Canada/Russia hockey summit series off the ground this summer, in time for the 35^th anniversary? Seems plausible, after all, you may have heard he is writing a book about hockey. And watches hockey. And likes hockey. Because he's a regular guy. Honest. He likes curling too.

Tretiak is spearheading a proposal to re-stage the '72 Summit Series, pitching an eight-gam confrontation between Russia's best hockey players and those of Canada this August on the 35th anniversary of the epic original.

Tretiak, who sits in the Russian parliament, says he has the support of both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

So this is Harper's plan. Canada beats the evil empire in August and he cruises to a majority in the fall, basking in the afterglow. If they lose though…Dion's fault. He must have given the game plan to France, who passed in on to the Russians. Harper majority, and treason charges for Dion.

If I were Steve though, I wouldn't find comparisons like this helpful:

That prompted the Russian ambassador to Canada, Georgiy Mamedov, to quip that the series will include two "enforcers."

But even the backing of two iron-willed leaders like Putin and Harper stands for little...

I've heard stories of Putin's "iron will."

No, no Georgiy, I'm not like Putin, I'm like Bush. Bush!!

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Fickle voters

Wow...

Volatile voters can't settle on one political party

OTTAWA (CP) - Canadians appear to be a fickle bunch when it comes to deciding what political party to support.

That's the finding of a new Decima poll provided to The Canadian Press. The survey suggests that a whopping 57 per cent of voters have changed their political allegiances over the past few months. That's up from 48 per cent of wavering voters two years ago. The poll of 1,000 adults found that the most mercurial voters were those who identified with the Green party.

The Conservatives had the most determined stable of supporters.

Decima President Bruce Anderson says it all means people shouldn't make too much about small shifts between the parties in national polls.

A Decima poll released Tuesday had the Conservatives at 35 per cent support nationally and the Liberals at 31 per cent.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservative six degrees of separation

The NDP's Paul Dewar wants an audit of all government appointments since the accountability act was passed, as noted by Woman at Mile 0. It's part of the fallout from these allegations the other day, now under investigation by the OPP.

A fine idea Paul, says I, but I couldn't help but be amused (should be slightly nauseated, but I'm too jaded to fake that) by this little snippet from the intrepid Bruce Cheadle's CP piece on the incestuous little world of Conservative Ottawa:

O'Brien's first campaign manager, Joe Varner, was also Kilrea's manager in the 2003 mayoral campaign. Varner is married to MPP Lisa MacLeod, Baird's former constituency assistant.

MacLeod's father, Daniel MacLeod of New Glasgow, N.S., was recently appointed to the National Capital Commission in Ottawa.

And it was Baird's intervention - at the request of candidate O'Brien - into a local transit plan funded in part with a federal grant that proved to be the turning point in the municipal election race.

And John Baird was in Hollow Man with…Kevin Bacon.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

An apology is due, minister

Bill Curry reports in the Globe today that the Conservative government will not issue an apology as part of a forthcoming settlement package for survivors of Indian residential schools.

First Nations groups are upset because this contradicts written agreement reached between the previous Liberal government and the Assembly of First Nations. They feel that promise for an apology should be honoured.

While I agree that it's not always appropriate to hold current governments to agreements reached by past governments, we're talking here about an agreement between First Nations peoples and the Government of Canada, not any political party. Some things should supersede politics.

The AFN is also wondering why Harper is nixing their promised apology when Harper has recently apologized on behalf of the government to Maher Arar and for the Chinese head tax.

I don’t want to play politics here, or attempt to ascribe motive to the Conservative decision. Instead I'd just like to know, as Indian Affairs minister Jim Prentice doesn't offer much of an explanation in the Globe piece, why no apology Minister? You say this is different from the Arar or the head tax cases. How?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Mandatory blog posting, Quebec election edition

I've only ever been over to Quebec a handful of times, usually for a sporting event. For example, five or so years back I went to see my BC Lions play the Allouetes at McGill Stadium. A few rows in front of me sat Gilles Duceppe himself, and the jeunes filles positively swooned over him. Much like that mystified me, so does Quebec politics.

So, I'll keep my obligatory post-Quebec election posting to aimless and uninformed speculation on the possible implications for the federal scene. Although, I'm not sure I can do it better than Feschuk has this morning, with this skewering of the pathetic post-poll panel punditry:

For instance, Charest’s humbling is bad for Harper, in that Harper personally invested so much in their relationship, but it’s also good for Harper in that the separatists were routed, even though that’s bad for Harper because Quebecers may ultimately confer a sympathy vote on the Bloc in a federal election to demonstrate that they’re not quite as opposed to sovereignty as it looked last night, which is actually good for Harper because he’ll have a separatist threat to play against and rally the federalist vote, exploiting Dion’s current weakness, which is actually bad for Harper because it will set Dion’s bar of expectations very low, allowing the Liberal leader to generate momentum this spring, which is good for Harper because spring is a warm and happy season that puts people in a good mood, which is bad for Harper because he hates people who are in a good mood, especially if they are gay, which is good for Harper because fitted T-shirts don't suit him anyway. Back to you, Lloyd.

I do find it difficult to accept the emerging conventional media and CPC wisdom that this is a victory for Harper, given the fact Charest was clearly his boy, Harper backed-up a Brinks truck of taxpayer dollars and dumped it into Quebec, and all he could buy his boy was a minority. That has to be a slap in the face for Steve. Still, given the conservatism of the ADQ spinning their surge as a positive signal for Harper is not without merit. Steve has never struck me as one for personal loyalty, indeed, he seems to have been cultivating Dumont, so it wouldn't be surprising to see Charest get the heave-ho and Dumont become Harper's new fair-haired boy.

Were I a Conservative though, or especially one of those moderate voters the Conservatives are desperately courting, I'd be leery about Steve and Mario getting into bed together. A concerning social conservative side of the ADQ emerged during this campaign, with a number of candidates dumped for troubling statements about women and minorities. Two groups Harper is investing heavily in wooing. Would it really be wise for Harper to hitch his wagon to a Quebec version of the early Reform Party?

They do, at least, have firmer common ground on a devolving vision of federalism, and provincial rights. The pressure will be on though, from both Charest and Dumont, for more. More powers, more money. How far will Harper be willing to go?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Police probing allegations involving the Conservative campaign co-chair

This story on CTV is a must read. While it is all allegations at this point and everything is unproven, quite a sordid picture certainly emerges about the seedier side of Conservative backroom politics. We should withhold judgment until the investigation is complete, but certainly these allegations deserve a full and proper hearing. All that is surprising though is the hypocrisy and the gall.

OPP probing alleged Tory link to mayoralty offer
Updated Mon. Mar. 26 2007 1:46 PM ET
Canadian Press

OTTAWA -- The Ontario Provincial Police have launched an investigation into a sworn affidavit that claims a senior Tory close to Prime Minister Stephen Harper was involved in an alleged bid to buy off an Ottawa mayoralty candidate.
(more)

I'll let the story speak for itself, and wait for the results of the investigation with interest. In the meantime, on a lighter note let me highlight this comment Reynolds makes about the $110,000/year parole board job:

Reynolds maintains there's nothing sinister. He said he would be happy to put Kilrea's name forward, or any other person's, for a Parole Board appointment because not many people want the job.

"They're looking for people to go on parole boards,'' said Reynolds."Most guys don't want the jobs. They don't pay that much.''

Dear John,

I'm a simple man with simple needs. I also believe in getting tough on crime. To serve my country and keep our communities safe, I'd be happy to endure the sacrifice of serving as a parole board member for the pittance of $110k/year. I'll even get by without a per diem. I'll pack a sandwich. Resume attached, fyi.

Conservatively yours,

Jeff

(h/t Dan)

UPDATE: Ted rightly points out things have been busy lately for the Conservatives. It was just last week we heard the RCMP was being asked to look into new information around allegations former MP Jim Hart was offered a payout to make way for Stockwell Day.

And in other Conservatives and the justice system news, a week earlier an Alberta judge ordered a new Conservative nomination race be held in Calgary-West, overturning the party-engineered acclimation of incumbent Rob "Nelson Mandella is a terrorist" Anders.

The Conservative lawyers sure are being kept busy these days.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Could this reunite Paul and Linda?

I read in the Vancouver Sun that my hometown in B.C. is being over-run with harbour seals, and the local Blame Seals First crowd complain the protected seals are eating all the salmon. Meanwhile, the seal huggers say humans are to blame for any decline in fish stocks, not cuddly wuddly seals.

Frankly, I remember what happened when the residents of Springfield went easy on the dolphins. I don't want to see that happen in Courtenay, seals taking over the city. Get tough on seals, says I!

Harbour seal cull needed
It's necessary to protect summer chinook run on Puntledge River, sport fish advisory board says
Larry Pynn, Vancouver Sun
Published: Monday, March 26, 2007
Sport fishermen are calling for a renewed cull of harbour seals near Courtenay on Vancouver Island just as research shows the species has increased 10-fold as a result of protection in local waters.

(more)

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Six Foot Jesus Made Of Chocolate

Sometimes really off topic press releases find there way into my e-mail box at work that have nothing to do with my work as a technology journalist. What some of these PR people are thinking I have no idea.

This one today at least, while wildly off topic, was at least amusing. Rather than post a photo I'll link to one here and be warned, when they said anatomically-correct they weren't lying...

**FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE* Press Contact:
March 2007 Sarah Cirkiel / Danielle Simone

Pitch Control Public Relations

212.475.4919
scirkiel@pitchcontrolpr.com
dsimone@pitchcontrolpr.com

Six Foot Jesus Made Of Chocolate
Cosimo Cavallaro’s Most Anticipated Show At Lab Gallery

NEW YORK (March, 2007) -- World renowned artist Cosimo Cavallaro unveils his latest and most striking installation at the Lab Gallery (at the Roger Smith Hotel, 47th and Lexington avenue) in the early morning hours of April 1st. Cavallaro’s work, entitled “My Sweet Lord” is a 6 foot tall, anatomically correct sculpture of Jesus Christ in milk chocolate.

“I’m truly thrilled to be working with Cosimo again,” says Matt Semler Creative Director of the Lab. “The sign of any great artist is how their work affects the observer. His art always gets a reaction, but this is the most dramatic piece of his career. It is absolutely amazing” The exhibit can be viewed from the street when the velvet curtains of the gallery open from midnight to 1 AM and 6 PM to 7PM (starting April 1st and closing April 7th).

Although Cavallaro has work in permanent collections of museums world-wide, he is best remembered for covering a New York City hotel room in melted cheese (1999). His Jesus is made with over 200 pounds of chocolate, which has been donated by the San Francisco based Theo Chocolate Company (theo as in the obrommin cacao or “Fruit of the Gods”). The confectionary Christ is having its world premier in time for the Easter holiday.

The exhibit is cosponsored by artnet, the respected on-line art gallery and art magazine. It has a supporter of serious artists like Cavallaro since 1995. http://www.artnet.com/

THE LAB (for installation + performance art) is a New York based, converted storefront turned fishbowl producing 30+ fast paced performance art and installation exhibitions annually. Aimed at furious midtown foot traffic, THE LAB’s programming is designed to confront modern relationships between art and audience and seeks to force interaction between high energy, “outropsective” exhibitions and nearly 25,000 daily passersby. It is THE LAB’s goal to reach out through the glass and capture, fascinate, amuse, bemuse, soothe, shake and satisfy any and all who pass within eye or ear shot of the corner of 47th and Lexington. For more information, call 212-339-2092, or email rogersmitharts@rogersmith.com.

THE GALLERY IS LOCATED ON THE CORNER OF 47TH STREET AND LEXINGTON AVENUE
ALL EXHBITIONS ARE ON VIEW 24/7.

For more information regarding The Roger Smith Hotel, The Lab, or Lily’s, to speak with a representative, or to schedule a tour of the space, please contact Danielle Simone, dsimone@pitchcontrolpr.com , or Sarah Cirkiel, scirkiel@pitchcontrolpr.com, Pitch Control Public Relations, 212.475.4919.

###

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Free speech, the school yard and cyberspace

You may have read or heard about this story, particularly if you live in the Toronto area. It generated quite a bit of water cooler debate with my work colleagues on Friday:

Are teens crossing the line with online insults?
By ANTHONY REINHART and CAROLINE ALPHONSO AND RACHEL DELAZZER
From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Kicked out of school over online insults against a vice-principal, Brad Parsons, the face of free expression's latest fight, took his place in the sun outside his Toronto high school yesterday.

Brad, 16, was suspended from Birchmount Park Collegiate this week for starting an online chat group, on a website called Facebook, where students were invited to register their dislike of the vice-principal. Four students who actually posted the derogatory comments were also given the boot.

(more)

As I see it, there are a couple of different issues here. First of all, the free speech vs. libel issue. Without knowing exactly what was said by these students in the online forum, it is difficult to know if it crossed the legal line and constitutes libel.

But here's the bottom line question for me: if the incident did not take place on school property, or on a school-sanctioned field trip, then why is the school stepping-in here and meting out discipline? What is their authority to police what students do, no matter how distasteful, off school property on their own time? Isn't this really a matter for the parents?

Now, if school computers were used that's another matter, but there's no indication that was the case. Also, if the remarks were indeed libelous or criminal, then the school can avail itself of the legal remedies available in the justice system. But I fail to see what authority the school has here to suspend these students. If they don't wish to pursue legal remedies, punishment is up to the parents.

I'm not a parent, so perhaps I see things differently. A colleague at work is a parent and she agreed with the school's decision to suspend the students. Frankly, were I a parent I'd resent the school's intrusion. I'd feel it's my responsibility to teach my child right from wrong here, and punish if necessary.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Woe is Joe, our Facebook foe?

Catching-up on the news I've missed whilst away, I hear that Joe Comuzzi was kicked-out of the Liberal caucus after saying he'll be voting for the Harper budget. Hard to have any sympathy for Joe, the budget is the grand-daddy of confidence votes and if you don't vote with your party on it, see ya later. Like it or lump it, that's our political system.

Anyway, I noticed today that Joe Comuzzi is the latest MP to get on Facebook. Only six friends so far, but one is Conservative blogging poobah Stephen Taylor.

And not only that, Joe has created his own group called, I kid you not, "Kicking Me Out Of Caucus Is Unfair!" Yes, woe is Joe.

He has also somehow found 74 members to join his little group. I really wonder how many are Liberals though, as quite a few are easily recognizable as Conservatives. And I'm pretty sure the majority of the members are Conservatives.

How do I know? Check the "related groups" section. These are set automatically based on the most common groups that members of this group are also members of. The top five for Joe's group?

1. Conservative Party of Canada
2. This Facebook group is unfair (anti-Dion)
3. Blogging Tories
4. Stephen Harper Fan Club
5. CPC Energy

Which says clearly a majority of the group members are Conservative supporters.

Actually, I have to wonder, is this even the real Joe Comuzzi? His group co-admin, after all, describes himself as "a conservative political junkie from Hamilton, Ontario currently residing in Toronto." He's not a member of the Parliamentary network, which requires verification by a parl.gc.ca e-mail address, like most MPs on Facebook are.

Also, would you use a photo for your group that makes you look like a crazyman?

Makes one wonder...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Wapell to retire!!

I'm told that last night Scarborough-Southwest "Liberal" MP Tom Wapell told his riding executive he would be announcing his retirement today.

Regular readers will know I'm not a big fan. I live in Scarborough-Centre, but I'd love to help get a real Liberal elected in that riding.

UPDATE: Confirmed by Canadian Press. And the prayers of millions are answered.

UPDATEST: Wappel is eulogized by his friends at the "Campaign Life Coalition" as a "champion of life." Take that all you people that hate, you know, living:

"Tom Wappel is a man of great integrity and deserves the appreciation of the constituents whom he served for so long and so well," said Jim Hughes, National President of Campaign Life Coalition (CLC). "He has been an outstanding and courageous champion of life throughout his career. He will be greatly missed by everyone who has had the privilege of working with him," he continued.

Excuse me. I think I threw-up in my mouth a little.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Political ad - Bloody brilliant

This video on YouTube looks to be a new political ad for the British Labour Party (not quite, see update). It's long at 2:30, and it has an edge, but it's certainly seems to be a novel new form of political advertising. And, as my British friends would say, I think it's bloody brilliant.

Could such a hard-edged ad work here in Canada against the Conservatives? Debatable. The consensus seems to be the Harper is scary concept is played, and unlike in England, Canadians are already getting a taste of Conservative government, although only in minority form. A majority could look vastly different.
What could be equally effective about this ad here though is the whole morning after hangover, stuck for four more years theme. That sort of a message played well here could potentially resonate. Anyway, really cool ad, it's nice to see political operatives thinking outside the box.



UPDATE: In the comments, Olaf points out this isn't an actual Labour Party ad, but rather a spoof ad commissioned by a British TV station to try and show political parties what good political advertising could be. They also have ads up for the other British parties. Either way, a good model I think for parties on both sides of the pond.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

(Pretty much) spin-free budget reaction

As mentioned, I'm down in Salt Lake City this week so I'm missing all the excitement of budget day. And while I've been subjected to lots of spin from all sides today around Microsoft and Novell's Linux partnership, I've so far escaped the budget tsunami.

(Let me say that by spin free I haven't been spun. But I'm sure I make be making some circular movements of my own.) Anyway, not having the time to delve into the budget enough at this point to be able to offer an overall opinion, I instead offer some comments having just read Flaherty's speech on the Web, and no media coverage or party spin.

*First, I couldn't resist a few snarky comments about this section:

We build from a foundation of strength.
Our unemployment rate is the lowest in 30 years.
Our fiscal fundamentals are the strongest in the G7.
We are paying down over $22 billion against the national debt. That’s $700 for every man, woman and child in Canada.
Our taxes are lower.
Our budget is balanced.
Mr. Speaker, in looking to the future, we take inspiration from our country’s magnificent past.

Even if he didn't thank the Liberal Party by name, 'magnificent' is pretty high praise indeed. But definitely a great way to describe a Liberal government that wrestled the deficit, balanced the budget, returned surplus after surplus, and gave Jim that “foundation of strength” to build from. So, you're welcome Jim.

*Reading his speech much of the language sounds, like last year, positively Liberal. I don't say that in a they're stealing our ideas way. Rather, their messaging, the issues they're talking about, and how they're talking about them, aren't necessarily reflective of traditional Conservative priorities, bur rather issues more closely associated with Liberals, or at least Red Tories. Again it's Harper appealing to the middle, election clearly in mind. I don't for a minute think his conversion is genuine. Even if his was, his supporters haven't budged.

*The increase in funding for the post secondary education portion of the CST sounds promising, although without time to get into all the numbers it's tough to say for sure. Still, if they are making real increases here that's welcome.

*They're going to spend $250 million more to create child care spaces. Maybe some spaces will actually get created now, fingers crossed?

*It wasn't that long ago that Conservatives were decrying infrastructure spending, and now they're at least claiming to be ramping it up. Rather that dwell on their being late to the party, I'd just like to say I'm glad they're finally here.

*Lines written by Jack Layton:
Today, we crack down on corporations that have avoided paying their fair share.
Third, we cherish the universality of our health care system, and aspire to strengthen it.

*Interesting to read about a National Water Strategy. Doesn't sound like a sexy issue, but it's more important than you think.

*Taxes are too high Jim? If so, why am I paying more income tax now than I did under the Liberal governmental?

*I remember when Conservatives favoured simplifying the tax system. Now we've got all kinds of tax credits designed to appeal to specific voting demographics, and even just plain tax breaks for the heck of it to targeted groups. As a Liberal I should be all for it, but I find myself balking. Maybe because I'm an unwed single male getting nada here? Nah.

*At first blush this is very much an election budget, designed to get Harper closer to his majority. If I were a died in the wool Conservative I'd be asking is this guy a Conservative or what? Then Doug Finley would box my ears and tell me to shudup and behave. But anyway, the devil is in the details. Judging a budget by the speech is like judging a box of cereal by the box. What the speech does tell you is the message the government is looking to send, and that's clear enough. Will the carpet match the drapes? I'll find out when I point my browser over to media land, but I wouldn't be surprised to find it doesn't. But I'll save that for after dinner.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

SES on the budget, Quebec, Charest and Harper

As we await the details of the federal budget this afternoon (it's all the buzz down here in Salt Lake City, I assure you) I found this latest data from everyone's favourite pollsters interesting. SES says the budget isn't likely to help Jean Charest or Steve Harper all that much in Quebec, at least in the short term.

With much of the budget details well-leaked by the Conservatives ahead of time (barring no doubt a few surprises later today) SES polled Quebecers on how the leaked and expected budget iniatives would influence their opinions of Harper and Charest. Here's the numbers:

Question - As you know, Prime Minister Stephen Harper supports the concept of “open federalism”. The Harper government has announced $350 million to support Quebec’s environmental plan. Likewise, there is expected to be additional new equalization transfers from the government of Canada to the province of Quebec in the federal budget.

As a result are you likely to view Stephen Harper more favourably, about the same or less favourably?

All Quebecers (N=500)
More favourably - 27.0%
About the same - 33.5%
Less favourably - 36.6%
Unsure - 2.9%

As a result are you likely to view Jean Charest more favourably, about the same or less favourably?

All Quebecers (N=500)
More favourably - 20.9%
About the same - 38.0%
Less favourably - 37.8%
Unsure - 3.2%

Associate with Provincial Liberals (N=129)
More favourably - 48.0%
About the same - 29.8%
Less favourably - 18.9%
Unsure - 3.3%

And the analysis from SES president Nik Nanos:

The polling shows that Harper's open federalism, new money for Quebec's environmental plan and expected new equalization transfers for the province do not have a major positive impact on his image among Quebec voters. Indeed, Quebecers are more likely to look less favourably on the Prime Minister. The research does show that for Charest the budget will be good at firming up individuals who most closely personally associate with the Liberal Party of Quebec.

My sense is that for the federal Conservatives the budget strategy has a number of layers. First, the timing and likely budget configuration increases the likelihood for it to pass and thus further sustains the Harper government. Second, the federal Conservatives can wait and see what bump..if any...materializes from the budget.

For Charest, beyond Liberals, the traction of the budget and open federalism at this time is weak. This could be a result of the view that a number of Quebecers see the budget as a potential federal intervention in provincial politics.

Sounds like a fair analysis of the numbers to me. With the big cavet that something big and unexpected in the budget today could toss all this out the window, I'm not overly surprised Quebecers aren't buying into what Harper has been selling to them. Which has to be a sock in the gut, given the effort he has expended trying to build his, and Charest's, support in the province that could well make or break his majority dreams. Interesting the poll says the sales pitch is hurting him there though, I wonder what's behind that.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

(Less than) 48 hours in Toronto

Apologies for the lack of blogging of late. I was down in San Diego (lovely city) for a conference, getting back into a comparatively chilly Toronto last night. And it's back on the road again tomorrow afternoon, off to Salt Lake City for another conference (but first a day of skiing here, possibly followed by an insider report on the American health care system).

As much as I enjoy traveling, it seems like I've been missing, and will be missing, a lot of fun and interesting blogging opportunities. From what I've been reading from afar it has been a pretty successful week two for Stephane Dion's cross-Canada tour. In particular, I was pleased to see some policy meat being put on the bones, answering the calls some of us in blogland have been making. At least three meaty policy speeches during this tour on the economy, law and order and of course, the environment; the reviews seem to be positive and when I finally get the chance I look forward to digging deeper into them.

And speaking of the Dion tour, I received a note about this video, and I see Michelle and Scott have blogged on it too.



It seems the Conservatives have had a staffer, who is paid not by the party but by the taxpapers, shadowing Dion across Canada spying on him with a video camera. Classy lads. I mean, that's common practice these days during campaigns anyway, but at least make sure they're on the party payroll, not the people's. Taxpayer-funded political spies? Yeesh. Insert your own partisan bombast here _______________.

The next week as well looks to be interesting. I'm sad to be out of town for St. Paddy's Day, particularly with Stephane and Carolyn Bennett both having fun green-beer fueled events in Toronto I'd have loved to made. And then there's budget day on Monday (with the Cons warning an election to soon follow), as Harper tries to put another puzzle piece in place for a spring election. With the Cons spending our money like it's on fire, it should be interesting. Remember when people looked to the right for fiscal discipline? Me neither, but I've heard it used to happen. Way back before the Liberals eliminated the deficit and ushered in an era of surpluses.

Anyway, since I probably won't be able to blog too much over the next few days until I get back to the T-Dot again Thursday, here's a few interesting posts I've come across around blogland:

Garth Turner has a post and video from Dion's eco-summit in Halton, and Zorpheous was there too and is posting coverage. Also, lots of coverage on the Liberal carbon emissions plan too. Meanwhile, I agree with Bowie, losing Anders would be a loss for oppo researchers nationwide. It would be much more fun to see Mr. Nelson Mandela is a terrorist get whacked in a general election. And what the heck is going on in Quebec?

Hope to be back with more regular, in depth (un)insightful commentary soon. Until then, good night and have a pleasant tomorrow.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Is the NDP sending donations overseas?

Speaking of the NDP's new pre-election advertising campaign, which they're actively soliciting donations to support, it's interesting to look at the company they appear to be using for the online video component of their campaign: VISMAIL.

Based in the United Kingdom and with their North American office in Minnesota, VISMAIL is an e-mail marketing company that allows marketers to send video ads in their e-mails. The video in the NDP e-mail uses their platform, click on the link and you're taken to the video running on their servers: http://www.vismailv2.co.uk/direct/clients/yrtvqss/temp1034/vismail.php?rid=17379&cid=765. Note the "co.uk" denoting a UK-based server.

I'm sure VISMAIL is a great company. Their clients include companies like BMW, Microsoft and United Christian Broadcasting.

But, particularly with the NDP looking for tax-receiptable donations with these e-mails and presumably paying for the campaign with donations as well, wouldn't it have been possible for "Canada's NDP" to find a Canadian e-mail marketing company to support, rather than sending that money overseas?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

NDP logic, and other oxymorons

It's so much fun being on the NDP e-mailing list. Got an amusing one this morning, after I fished it out of Hotmail's spam filter.

It seems smiling Jack has a new TV ad, joining Steve Harper in the pre-election advertising game. What fun. But take a look at the note the Dippers sent out to the rank and file. There's a number of amusing contradictions.

First they take a shot at Harper for doing negative pre-election advertising. That's fine, but watch the ad they're pimping, while it's not as negative as the CPC ads it's not positive either.

They go on to say Dion doesn't have the money, leadership or vision to fight back, but Smilin' Jack does! And then in the next breath, they ask for money to get the ad on the air. But wait, didn't you just say Jack has the money?

Then go and watch the ad. It looks like Jack has the vision Dion doesn't to fight back against Harper's negative ads by...attacking the Liberals. Frankly Jack, I'm glad Dion doesn't have the vision to attack himself.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

We're serious about the environment, honest!

While Steve Harper would have us believe he totally believes in getting serious about the environment and global warming, that he all of a sudden realizes it is a serious problem that needs to be tackled, and that his commitment is genuine and not based on polling and political wedges, it would seem his blogging army hasn't quite gotten the message:

The link would appear to go to a video questioning global warming science, although the link was dead last I checked. Interesting though that Blogging Tory admins would chose to highlight what they call "the great global warming swindle" while their leader is trying to convince Canadians he totally believes in the so-called science.

Makes one wonder just how genuine the commitment Harper and hos Conservative brethren profess really is, and wheter or not it would continue once they had a majority government...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

A day of good, bad, and good

The Good: The folks at American Airlines, after a flight over the Grand Canyon, got me into San Diego over 30 minutes early. I mean, how often does that happen?

The *&$^ Bad: Left my iPod in the seatpocket of my Toronto/Chicago flight, and by the time I realized it, the plane had pushed back on to its next destination. Told I need to file a lost item report, in case some one turns it in. Not holding my breath. Got a year of use out of it anyway...time to upgrade? Also bad: those old MD-80s suck.

The Good: Got off the plane in San Diego to warm, sunny weather of 28 degrees Celsius. Perfect weather for picking up my conference badge, talking a walk around downtown, and enjoying a pre-dinner swim in pool at the Westin.

The Even Better: This week's forecast...

Light blogging ahead, back Friday.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Renewal, and generational change

A CanWest story this weekend says up to 12 current Liberal MPs have or will be announcing they won't be running in the next election. While the Con talking heads are already spinning, in fact this is a great opportunity to breath some young, progressive fresh air into the Liberal Party and make some of the renewal we've all been talking about happen.

Certainly a lot of the retiring MPs will be missed. I'd like to send a particular shout-out to Andy Scott, a great guy who was our “twin MP” in Vancouver Island North and was a regular visitor and great help to our riding association, even after his return to cabinet. As for some of the other retiring MPs, well, let's just say I was never a big Jean Lapierre fan, and I won't be mourning Paul Steckle's retirement.

Now, as I said, the Cons have already been trying to spin something here, but then again, what else would they do? Here's CPC spinner Tim Powers over at MacLean's:

However, you have to wonder why more Liberals are dropping off the ticket than joining it. In the last 48 hrs, three former cabinet ministers have said they don't think Team Liberal is such a dream boat and have started to swim to shore. What is it that Andy Scott, Jim Peterson and Joe McGuire haven't shared with the rest of us?

Ably countered by our own CalgaryGrit:

First off, when MPs in their 60s announce they're not going to run again, it doesn't mean the ship is sinking - it means that they want to golf and play bridge, rather than spend every waking hour away from their families heckling each other in the House of Commons. I could just as easily ask what Ken Epp and John Williams haven't shared with the rest of us about the Conservative electoral chances in Edmonton?

Heck, even Peter Stoffer is able to stop spinning and talk like a person, and he's in the NDP!:

Stoffer discounted suggestions a Liberal wave of desertions is about to start because Prime Minister Stephen Harper's momentum appears to be growing.

He noted many of the Liberals have been in the Commons for years and said Dion is "probably looking for a younger Liberal party, a newer Liberal party."

Exactly. We have a very veteran caucus, and it's not surprising that a number of them are ready to move on. They're earned their retirement, and this is a great opportunity for party renewal.

As Sinestra notes, this opens up a number of very winnable ridings that could be used, not only to get more female candidates, but more actual female MPs. And male or female, young, energetic, bright and progressive new MPs.

A new and renewed Liberal team to take on a Harper team that, despite dumping taxpayer money off the back of a truck, has still failed to resonate with Canadians. No wonder Timmy is spinning hard.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Will run a cabinet ministry for a car, driver and Challenger Jet access

I think this is just too funny to be true, but then again, knowing Emerson....Quito reports that he's heard David Emerson has been sniffing around the Dion OLO, looking to see what role he might be able to play in a future Liberal government.

David, of course, used to be a Liberal cabinet minister, and promised to be Harper's biggest enemy. Then, after the Cons won the last election, he crossed the floor over to the Cons...well, I guess he just stayed on the same side of the floor while everybody else crossed, but anyway, he became a Con cabinet minister.

And now, in case the Cons lose, he's hedging his bets and looking to come back to the Liberals...only if we win I'm sure. Sounds crazy, sure, but there have been reports Emerson has been regretting joining Steve's merry band.

Anyway, I gather the good folks in the OLO told David to screw off, and rightly so. Looks like Steve needs to tend to his caucus...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Salutin on Dion and conventional wisdoms

Globe columnist Rick Salutin makes what I think is a fairly relevant point about the track record of the track record of establishment buzz and conventional wisdoms…

The record: I hear the buzz (definitely a “how things are” kind of concept) in Ottawa is that Stéphane Dion is a dud. Makes me think of the buzz on previous Liberal leaders. In 1984, insiders said new leader John Turner had “the royal jelly.” He campaigned wretchedly and lost to Brian Mulroney. In 1988, they said he couldn't even control his own caucus. In that election, he brilliantly outperformed Mr. Mulroney and NDP leader Ed Broadbent, though he didn't win.

In 1993, they called new Liberal leader Jean Chrétien “yesterday's man,” just before he won the first of three straight majorities. He didn't fall to the “refreshing” new face of Kim Campbell, who reduced her party to two seats. That same election, they said Preston Manning and his Reform Party had “peaked too soon” and would never amount to anything.

In 2004, new Liberal leader Paul Martin had a “juggernaut” that couldn't be stopped. If you're a Liberal leader, you might prefer not to be anointed by these prophets.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Another Harper flip-flop

From the Vancouver Sun comes word of yet another campaign promise Steve Harper has decided he'd rather not keep (h/t While the Earth Burns).

During, and just after, the election:

Harper, while unveiling his “Stand up for B.C. platform” in Victoria during the 2006 election campaign, promised an inquiry into the “mismanagement” of the Fraser River fishery.

He reiterated that promise after becoming prime minister in a public statement that included a vow to end “racially divided” fisheries on the West Coast. But the government hasn’t fulfilled either vow.

And today:

(CPC Fisheries Minister Loyola) Hearn said a judicial probe wouldn’t likely unearth anything that wasn’t raised in two 2005 reports, one by a parliamentary committee and another by former B.C. judge Bryan Williams.

“There’s a lot more important things to do, and … judicial inquiries cost five, 10, 15, 20 million dollars,” Hearn told The Vancouver Sun.

“And there are a lot of ways I could spend (that money) that would do a lot of good, rather than finding out the same thing we’ve already found out at least twice in the past, and probably knew even before we had these studies."

Think they'll ever admit it was a stupid promise to make in the first place, driven not by sound policy but by political opportunism? Nah, me neither.

Don't get me wrong, I'm actually glad Steve has sagely decided to flip-flop on this one. And, in fact, if he's interested I'd be happy to send over a list of other campaign promises I'd love him to flip-flop on. You know how to reach me Steve.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

And he'll send you to your room without dinner too!

Interesting piece in the Globe today that offers some insight into Steve Harper's Karl Rove, CPC campaign chairman Dough Finley. Apparently he really turned on the charm in a recent trip to New Brunswick.

First, Doug told the local peasants that they'd damm well better have a candidate nominated by March 23, or he's just would appoint one himself. An appointed candidate, the horror! I agree, nomination meetings can be so pesky Doug, good thing you and your supporters have never gotten on pious soapboxes about grassroots democracy and the importance of local nominations...oh wait, never mind. My bad. But why such a hurry Doug, why March 23? After all, you don't want an election any time soon...

On that note, no matter what spin you hear later about who precipitated the election, Doug has already made it clear HE will be picking the election date:

Some local party members also say Mr. Finley said that the election date would be determined by himself and Mr. Harper -- and perhaps chief of staff Ian Brodie. Others say he indicated that he would work collaboratively with the party's national council.

He also had kind words for Conservative minister Greg Thompson, who had previously told locals they had some time to do a proper candidate search to find the best candidate:

Some of the people who attended the meeting say Mr. Finley suggested politicians like Mr. Thompson should stick to cutting ribbons and passing out cheques rather than messing in the business that is usually conducted in the backrooms. One man who heard those remarks said he believes they were made in jest.

Yeah, I'm getting the sense he's a real joker, that Finley. Charming fellow. Just get your talking points from the PMO, Mr. Thompson, and smile like a good boy...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Review: French Kiss, Stephen Harper's Blind Date With Quebec

I've rather enjoyed Chantal Hebert's columns in the Toronto Star over the years, but I have to confess to becoming increasing frustrated with her over the course of the Liberal leadership campaign and since because of her seeming hate-on for a Stephane Dion. I was concerned that would make this a difficult read, but luckily Dion is spared the knife in her new book French Kiss: Stephen Harper's Blind Date With Quebec.

The title actually seems to be a bit misleading, as only a portion of the book actually deals with Quebec issues, and a smaller portion still tackles the nascent Conservative breakthrough and attempts since to expand the CPC presence in the province. A great deal of the book is also a wider political discourse where Hebert discusses issues from reforming parliament to uniting the Left.

It's the Quebec stuff that is interesting though, and I can't say I always agreed with her. We're miles apart on the fiscal imbalance, for instance. Still, hearing the Quebec perspective on this and a variety of other issues is interesting, and educational. Even though I've followed national politics for a while, I think there's still a certain degree of English-Canadians are from Mars, French-Canadians are from Venus in Canada. So it's interesting to learn a bit more about where my Quebec friends are coming from, even if I still don't agree with them on all the issues.

All in all, an interesting read, Hebert offers some new insights and informative commentary. I can't help but feel she misses the mark somewhat though. Despite all the surrounding history presented it doesn't seem like her central thesis, Harper's blind date with Quebec, was adequately addressed. It seemed more like a collection of elongated columns than a tightly-woven narrative.

Still, worth reading for Westerners like myself looking to learn more about our Quebecois cousins and what makes them politically tick.

For other takes Olaf, Pample the Moose and Bound by Gravity also have reviews.

A review copy was provided by the publisher to facilitate this review.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Good policy vs. good politics

Riddle me this, Michael Bryant. If "being smart on politics is dumb politically" then does that mean being dumb on politics is smart politically? That's the Ontario Liberal AG's advice to his federal cousins in the Globe today: get dumb on crime.

OK, maybe that's a tad unfair. I don't like being the sort that shoots the messenger, and Bryant's wider thesis isn't totally without merit. Would have been nice not to have to read it in the newspaper, but whatever. But this quote…

"Being smart on crime is dumb politically if there are no wedges and little substance."

…is more than just a touch infuriating. I think it speaks though to an age old debate, the one of good politics vs. good policy. Rarely are the two the same. And there's no better issue to illustrate the conundrums therein than the crime issue.

Most statistical measurements indicate that crime has been steadily declining over the years. Any survey on the topic though will tell you that people feel less safe today then they did X years ago. Why the dichotomy? Who knows. Theories abound. The media preoccupation with crime, giving every incident heavy play on the local news, is a popular culprit.

Whatever the reason though, the point is people still feel less safe, and they're demanding action. Bryant is saying ignoring that feeling would be perilous politically, and I'm with him so far. Which brings us to the question of what to do.

Here's where he loses me, and with statements like these made me double-check to see whether this fellow is a Liberal or not:

"The typical federal Liberal approach to crime, in a word, is a boomer approach that is stuck in the summer of love."

Speaking of summers of love, I think someone needs to remind Michael we never did decriminalize marijuana and he shouldn't toke while writing policy papers. Because that is a patently false, simplistic and stupid characterization of Liberal criminal justice policy. We've always advocated a balanced approach of tackling root causes AND tough on crime measures that work.

Paying any attention to root causes is a waste of time though, seems to be his contention. Sure, it may work, but that's secondary, it not politically sexy so forget about it. Instead, Bryant advocates a string of "tough on crime" measures that have been tried in the U.S. and have been spectacular failures in actually reducing crime. Doesn't matter, he says:

Mr. Bryant contends such reasoning fails to "embrace the irrefutable logic of incapacitation," the policy of getting criminals off the street and in jail, which the paper describes as "a powerful tool to rebuild communities under siege."

Or, in other words, throw everyone in jail and throw away the key. We're going to need to build bigger jails, aren't we?

Look, I agree that the Harper government has been very effective in PORTRAYING themselves as being tough on crime. They haven't actually done anything effective to actually REDUCE crime, but politics is perception, and they've successfully built the perception.

So, there is a challenge here for the LPC, I agree. We can't ignore the fact that, despite declining crime rates, people are feeling less safe. And we can't ignore the fact Steve Harper is parasitically taking advantage of that fear to portray himself as hard on crime, and the Liberals soft, reality be dammed.

Is the answer though, as Bryant suggests, to abandon all crime policy that is sensible, policy-wise, for ineffective measures that will however make us seem tough on crime and make people feel safer?

Neither is the answer. We've never taken an either/or approach. Abandoning measures aimed at tackling the root causes of crime would be a mistake; whether it's politically sexy or not such measures actually do help reduce crime. We need to make that case better. To acknowledge the political realities though we also need to put more emphasis on the other half of the coin, and come up with some new proposals that show we're serious about being tough on crime. Not, though, by recycling failed American policies a la Harper, but with measures that would actually help reduce crime AND make people feel safer. And fight Harper's politics of perception, show why his "tough" proposals are ineffective.

The politics of fear may be effective Michael. That doesn't mean we should get down in the muck and play that game.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Want an election? Me? You're crazy!

Put another nail in the coffin for this parliament. The Conservatives are quickly and quietly putting the pieces in place for the election Steve Harper still continues to insist he totally doesn't want for a few more years yet.

On Friday, the Conservatives decided to cancel their national policy convention, which was scheduled for November in Winnipeg. If I can digress for a moment…November in Winnipeg, December in Montreal, do all political parties hate their members? Can we all get on board with bringing the Turks and Caicos into Canada? Now that's a winter convention location I could get behind.

Anyway, the convention was postponed until fall 2008 because of the imminent possibility of an election. Also, attending both the CPC campaign college this month and the convention could have put people over the legal donation limit, and I guess they've decided to start following that law for a change.

More interesting to note though is the recent change in messaging from the Con spinners. It was typified by Jim Prentice on CTV's Question Period over the weekend. Rather than the usual line of we don't want an election, we're going to govern until 2010 or whenever their fixed election date is, here's what Prentice had to say:

Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice refused Sunday to dampen election speculation, repeatedly coming back to the immediate parliamentary calendar when asked about his party's rising stock.

"I see a very busy month ahead," Prentice said when asked whether rising polling numbers for the Tories suggest to him a majority mandate is within sight.

"I see the budget coming later in the month. (Environment Minister) John Baird has spoken about his plans relative to the environment in the month ahead. So it's going to be a month that Canadians will be able to take stock of how this government is moving forward in a very activist way."

Your key phrase there is "taking stock." As in hey, look at all the great stuff we've done, don't we deserve to be re-elected, maybe with a majority, please? (Unless he was pleading for Stock Day to cross the floor…take Stock, please!) A subtle change perhaps, but I think in conjunction with Prentice's refusal to offer the usual "we don't want an election" platitude a telling one.

So, yet another piece of evidence Harper will be engineering his own defeat and triggering an election sooner, rather that later. I'm betting this spring. No doubt he's at home now practicing his totally surprised, didn't want this election, it's all the Liberal's fault face.

Really, though, particularly in minorities, all the time all parties spend to try to not "get blamed" for precipitating an election is rather lame. A few days in, most people could care less who started it. They just want to finish it.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Opps, Peter McKay did it again...

MacLean's capital diarist Mitchel Raphael has the latest on everyone's favourite formerly progressive Conservative, Peter McKay.

You may remember Peter as the guy who told former NDP leader Alexa McDonough to stick to her knitting, called ex-girlfriend Belinda Stronach a dog and then lied about it despite the audio evidence, and mocked NDP MP Dawn Black in another question period exchange last spring.

It seems Peter was at it again last week, turning his patented McKay charm on Liberal MP Carolyn Bennett, advising her to just “calm herself” and “be a little more helpful.” Man, Peter does have a way with the ladies, doesn't he?

Mitchel helpfully supplies the Hansard:

Hon. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul’s, Lib): "Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government seems to have it in for the UN. It has ignored the UN treaty on cluster bombs, the UN climate change treaty, the UN convention on the rights of disabled people and now this convention for disabled persons.

"When will the Prime Minister stop taking dictation from the White House? Canadians want an independent foreign policy.

"Would the minister tell us why he is embarrassing Canadians by refusing to sign this convention without hiding behind consultation. That happens before ratification."

Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, CPC): "Mr. Speaker, I do not know quite what to say to that. As I mentioned, we are of course working toward the ratification of the UN convention on the rights of the disabled. We have been very involved in the process from the very beginning.

"We are very active at the United Nations in all of the discussions. If the hon. member would just calm herself somewhat and be a little more helpful she would realize that this is something that will happen. We have not reached the date yet."

And from the Dawn Black exchange back in May:

Ms. Dawn Black: "Mr. Speaker, Canadians deserve to know the answers to these important questions, most of which were asked by the government itself while in opposition.

"Will the minister concede that in fact the government has no clue as to how long we are going to be there, no idea how much it is going to cost and no strategy for how we are going to get out? Canadians deserve these answers. When will the government come--

The Speaker: The hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs.

Hon. Peter MacKay (Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, CPC): "Mr. Speaker, I was having difficulty hearing the member as well. Maybe she could raise her voice in her next question."

"What we know, obviously, is that Canada, as I said, is part of a very important effort to try to eradicate."

What a catch. And he's still single ladies! Condi, you'd better tie him down while you still can...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Keeping the so-cons in Harper's tent

A topic of discussion in blogland recently has been is Stephane Dion taking the Liberals to the left, and is that good or bad. I don't quite agree with the premise, and think it's more of a Conservative talking point than reality, but that's a discussion for another day. Today, I'd like to look at Steve Harper, and where he's taking the Conservative Party.

We know that since the 2004 election Steve has been trying to moderate himself and his party to appeal more to centrist voters, a necessary step if he's going to broaden his support enough to gain a majority. So he's clamped down his caucus and his ministers to an unprecedented degree, and pleaded with the social conservative wing of his party to just shut-up and keep quiet until he gets his majority. He's tossed them the odd bone here and there, with favourable judicial and board appointments, but for the most part he hasn't been advancing their causes at all legislatively.

As I've said before, I don't think Harper is a scary social conservative. He's a decentralizing fiscal conservative, which I also find a tad scary, but that's another story. But while he's no so-con, a lot of his supporters are, and without their organization and votes he wouldn't be here today, on the edge of the majority. And he needs them to stay on board.

So, the question for Harper is, can he keep his right-wing base satisfied and on the team while also building support on his left-wing from centrist voters? If he just ends up trading righties for centrists he's only treading water.

It's a delicate balancing act, and how well Harper handles it may well be more important to his electoral success than anything the Liberals can do. And how is he doing? It appears some cracks may be forming in his social conservative coalition.

I came across a copy of the January newsletter of Campaign Life Coalition Canada on the subway recently, and it actually offered some interesting reading. A rather large lobby group, the CLC describes itself as the political wing of the pro-life movement in Canada and it has strong ties to the Conservative Party.

They're starting to sour on Harper though. They weren't at all impressed with his half-hearted attempt at re-opening same sex marriage, seeing through Harper's attempt to placate, them knowing Harper had no intention of using the notwithstanding clause, the only way SSM could be overturned:

It was clear that Stephen Harper and his advisors wanted this issue to disappear; get it over with early enough so that most voters wouldn’t have the ‘divisive’ debate fresh in their minds going into the next election, but late enough for social conservatives to remember that he had kept his promise to try to re-open debate on it.
...
The prime minister himself was not present during the debate that preceded the vote and only a relative handful of MPs from all parties, including the Conservatives, were present during the actual debate. Many pundits took that as confirmation that the Harper government was merely going through the motions of fulfilling its promise - a bone thrown to social conservative voters – rather than a serious attempt to restore traditional marriage. Most journalists reported that Harper desperately wants the issue to go away.
...
Unfortunately, Harper also said he had no plans to introduce a defence of religion act saying that it was not necessary at this time. This contradicts his previous, emphatic statements that C-38 did not actually protect those who hold religious beliefs opposed to same-sex ‘marriage’ – but what has changed since June 2005?
...
Once again, the prime minister has taken the easy route and failed to show leadership on vital moral issues, preferring to play politics with them.

So, clearly they're pissed with Harper over the SSM vote. Basically, they're saying he flip-flopped and he showed weak leadership and played politics. No where have we heard rhetoric like that before?

It seems their disappointment goes beyond just SSM though. A separate article in the newsletter is devoted solely to Harper and social conservatives:

It is quite obvious that Harper wants this issue to go away. It is also obvious that he is counting on the gratitude of traditional values voters in the next election. In January 2006, weekly church-going Christians tipped the balance of power to the Conservatives and Harper needs to keep them in his big tent to win the next election.
...
Pro-life and pro-family Canadians must not lose sight of the bigger picture and blindly follow Harper or his party. They must continue to pressure the party, and continue the battle for the rights of the traditional family, along with the battle for the rights of unborn Canadian children. The issue will not just go away. It can’t, since the current situation defies nature, defies reason and will inevitably lead to great harm to our nation. The issue is far from decided.

More Canadians who value life and family will make these issues priorities in their voting, and nominate or support candidates, regardless of party affiliation, who will uphold the sanctity of human life and family in all its aspects, and restore the uniqueness of traditional marriage.

So, they're not leaving the party yet, although I wouldn't be surprised to see many stay at home in election day, depending on the local candidate. It does look like they are going to flex their muscle to get more socially-Conservative MPs nominated, and hopefully elected.

This poses some interesting scenarios. First, if the so-cons stay home that's a big chunk of votes lost to Harper. Second, if they get lots of so-con Con nominees selected then no matter what moderate messaging Harper is doing nationally, they will face a tough battle locally being called-out on their so-con views and less will be elected. And third, if they do get more so-con Con Mps elected, then Harper will have an extremely hard time running a moderate government while trying to tame a wild so-con caucus demanding action.

Anyway, while the Liberal Party are facing some challenges, clearly the Conservatives are not without difficult challenges to overcome as well.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Federally mandated poll post

I've been busy at work today but I have been informed by the CRTC that if I don't do a post on polling tout de suite I'll forfeit my secret blogger decoder ring.

Not wanting that to happen, and still being busy, please allow me to reprint this post from August 3, 2006, at a time there was much polling joy in Liberal land, called Polls are for dancing:

There seems to be much glee and rejoicing around the Liberal blogsphere these days over recent positive poll results, including a Decima poll today that shows the Liberals just one point behind the Conservatives.

Positive news, to be sure. But let's not get carried away here. In fact, let's try not to pay too much attention to the polls at all. Was it that long ago that we were very low in the polls, subject to lots of Conservative carping about their coming majority? Things change quickly, and they can change quickly again.

I consider polling to be mainly a junk science anyway, take a look at how well most polling companies did calling the last election. Public opinion is also a fickle thing, and can change on a dime. This week the results seem to be driven by a poor opinion of Harper's Middle East policy. Who knows what the issue will be next week.

My point is that we shouldn't pay attention to the polls because our ability to influence them, particularly in opposition, is limited. And no matter what our position in the polls, our job is still the same.

I think we’re on the right track with a good leadership race that is now heating up. I think we need to be a more forceful and effective opposition when Parliament resumes in the fall, and I hope that message goes out at the caucus meetings this month in Funcouver.

We need to just keep doing our job, and if we do it well the people will come around and the support will be there. Newspapers may like polls, but for us there's only one poll that counts. And I don’t mean SES.

Lesson being, things change, and can change quick, so don’t get hung-up on polls good or bad. We need to stop obsessing over every poll result, trying to debunk it or issue dire warnings. We know we have work to do. We know what needs to be done. So let's just do it.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Imagine if...Michael Foriter had been environment minister?

According to a new book by Chantal Hebert it very nearly happened. I've nearly finished French Kiss: Stephen Harper's Blind Date with Quebec and I'll have a review up in a day or two. But I wanted to share this excerpt, which was news to me at least (emphasis mine):

The appointment of Rona Ambrose to the file had been an afterthought; Harper had originally considered starting off his mandate on that front with an absentee minister from the House of Commons. In an early Cabinet plan, Michael Fortier, the prime minister's Senate appointee, would have taken the portfolio with him to the upper house – where he would have been largely sheltered from daily opposition attacks over the Kyoto Protocol.

In hindsight, it was providential for the Conservatives that the scheme fell through…

Was a miracle for Steve is what is was. Could you imagine the Conservatives trying to pretend to be serious about the environment and climate change if the minister responsible were an unelected, unaccountable Senator that couldn't be questioned in the House of Commons?

And really, just the fact that Steve was even considering this, and that it was for the very reason of hiding the environment file from accountability, I think speaks volumes to the true commitment, or lack thereof, Harper really has to the environment issue.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Thoughts on leadership

Over the last few days I've been reading a lot in the media and the blogshpere about the process leading up to the vote on the renewal of the anti-terror legislation last week, and the aftermath of its defeat. Particularly, about the handling of the file by Stephane Dion and its fallout going forward.

The media, for their part, seem wholly focused on the politics of it, enamored with tales of caucus intrigue and what not, while devoting next to no coverage about the provisions themselves, and the arguments for and against them.

But never mind the media. Also interesting has been the Conservative spin on this, which I've seen being parroted by the supposedly neutral media, and even by some Liberal supporters against the Dion's decision to not support renewal.

It goes a little something like this: Dion was a political opportunist that took the easy way out, deciding to score political points and ignore members of his own caucus, the public, Air India and 9/11 families. This, they argue, shows weak leadership. There's more, soft on terror, extremists and so on, but I'd like to focus on this talking point.

Poppycock. It's being a political opportunist, to, by their argument, go against prominent ex-ministers, caucus members, the families of terror victims and public opinion? THAT is the easy way out? Sounds like a pretty hard way to me. It would be easy to just give in to all that pressure, would it not?

It makes no sense. It would seem to me that it takes real leadership to, despite prominent ex-ministers, caucus members, the families of terror victims and public opinion, take a moral stand, and stand-up for what you believe to be right and true. To say maybe I'll take a hit on this, maybe it won't be immediately popular, but not renewing these provisions is the right thing to do and I'm going to stand-up and say so, damm the torpedoes, because right is right.

That, in my book, is real leadership.

UPDATE: Via Dan, a great column by Dion in the National Post.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers