Duffy drama obscures a concerning rift on sovereignty in Harper cabinet

While yesterday's press conference by Mike Duffy's lawyer further ensnaring the Prime Minister's Office (beyond the departed Nigel Wright) into the Senate expense drama and Stephen Harper's transparent evasions in question period will dominate today's clips and political chatter, it's obscuring a more serious and concerning issue: an apparent rift in Harper's cabinet over sovereignty.

At issue is Bill 99 which, in essence, was the Quebec government's response to the federal Liberal government's Clarity Act, which sought to lay out the terms under which the federal government would consider a vote on succession by a province. Bill 99 essentially rejected the Clarity act and was challenged in the courts, a process which is just picking up steam now, many years later. For all the background on this, please read this post by Paul Wells.

As Wells notes, the federal government has decided to intervene in this case with its own brief, largely supporting the position of the last Liberal government as expressed in the Clarity Act. However, at least one Quebec member of the Harper government appears offside with this position: Denis Lebel.

 Lebel was being asked about a court case over secession rules in which the feds are siding against the Quebec government. 

A Montreal radio host repeatedly asked Lebel, who was trying to change the subject, whether as a Quebecer he believed 50 per cent plus one was enough. 

Finally, Lebel bit at one point, when he was asked whether he considered 50 per cent plus one "clear" enough: "We've always said we'd leave that to Quebecers but, yes, it is for me," he said. 

Lebel's comments were quickly disvowed by the Prime Minister's Office, which noted curtly that "the position of the Federal Government is reflected in the factum submitted to the court last week."

Lebel isn't just another member of the Conservative caucus though. If so, while his opinion would be unfortunate, his veering from the government line would be noteable, but not troubling. But Lebel is in cabinet, and is Harper's senior minister for Quebec. As such, he is required to represent the government line in the province, or resign from cabinet. Michael Chong had to take the same step for a less serious transgression than this.

The government cannot be of two positions when it comes to as serious an issue as the unity of the country. Lebel needs to resign from cabinet or Harper needs to fire him. Chong took the honourable path; we'll see what Lebel does.

Perhaps Lebel could join the NDP, as they also have no problem with breaking up Canada on a slim vote of 50 per cent plus one.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Liberals need to rethink their Quebec approach

Since the election of former Quebec cabinet minister Thomas “Tom” Mulcair as leader of the NDP last month, much attention has been paid to the political situation in Quebec and the consensus seems to be the Liberals are screwed in the province.

Consolidating NDP gains in Quebec is certainly a priority for the party, and as a high-profile former minister in the Charest government whose departure from cabinet was spun as a matter of principle, Mulcair gives the NDP their best shot at holding and building on those gains.

Already, commentators such as Chantal Hebert are touting Mulcair as the new federalist champion, a position the Liberals used to like to claim:

He is well placed to establish the NDP as the default federalist party in Quebec — and, by the same token, to reduce its dependency on the nationalist vote at the expense of the Liberals.

As of the convention, Mulcair has become the top Quebec federalist on the federal scene, coming second for pre-eminence in the province’s federalist line-up to Premier Jean Charest.

While I don’t think she intended the comment in this way, Hebert also obliquely hinted at the potential weakness for Mulcair here:

Mulcair’s federalist credentials are important to his national standing. They will matter even more in Quebec if the Parti Québécois wins the provincial election.

Which raises the legitimate question: just how strong are his federalist credentials? A closer examination puts him firmly in the mainstream of Quebec’s political elite, the same “federalists” that savagely attacked Stephane Dion, dismissed Jean Chretien as unpolished and un-Quebec and tried to sideline him from the last referendum, and are determined to play footsie with soft nationalists by demanding ever more special powers and special treatment for Quebec.

The 30^th anniversary of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms was yesterday, and the statements of both Mulcair and the Conservative government are interesting. It’s pretty clear both are fishing in that same soft-nationalist waters.

Here’s part of the NDP’s statement, which was finally released late in the day Tuesday after the media became vocal wondering if the party was going to ignore the charter’s anniversary:

At the same time, the anniversary of the Charter also serves to remind us that, 30 years after the repatriation of the Constitution, Quebec is still not a signatory to the most fundamental compact of our democracy.

 As such, New Democrats will continue on the path laid out by Jack Layton, working to create the conditions that will one day allow Quebec to embrace the Canadian constitutional framework. We will work tirelessly to give real meaning to the unanimous recognition that the Québécois form a nation within Canada.

Similar comments from Harper on why the federal government is only marking the charter anniversary with a brief press release:

“In terms of this as an anniversary, I think it's an interesting and important step, but I would point out that the Charter remains inextricably linked to the patriation of the Constitution and the divisions around that matter, which as you know are still very real in some parts of the country,” Mr. Harper said.

And then there’s the NDP’s Sherbrooke Declaration and their opposition to the Clarity Act, a position they’ve tried to soft-play in the rest of Canada.

There has long been a tug of war within the Liberal Party of Canada between the nationalist wing (dominant in the Quebec Liberal establishment) and the strong federalist wing typified by Jean Chretien and Dion. Recent comments by Chretien illustrate the wider divide:

Jean Chrétien says Quebec politicians have cultivated a “culture of grievance” over the province's exclusion from the 1982 deal to patriate the Constitution – even though Quebeckers overwhelmingly supported it at the time and have been benefiting from it ever since.

"It will always be like that,” Mr. Chrétien told The Canadian Press. “They have a culture of grievance over it, not looking at the facts.”

I’ve long argued the Liberal Party should play to itsstrengths and become that strong, unapologetic federalist champion that puts facts before emotion instead of courting soft-sovereignists. That makes sense now more than ever, with both Harper and Mulcar courting the nationalist vote. Attracting those votes has always been difficult for the party of the charter and repatriation, and it will be even more so with Harper and Mulcair fighting for them too.

And the fact is, no one in Quebec politics today is flying the Maple Leaf and speaking to that staunch and unapologetic federalist community. It may not be as big a pie as the nationalist vote, but it’s definitely there and the Liberals have a chance to own it if we embrace our history and our strengths.

I was pleased to see comments from interim Liberal leaderBob Rae yesterday, which echo much of what Dion has been saying on the topic for years:

Quebec is not an oppressed minority, Canada is not a dictatorship, Canadian federalism, democracy, and the protection of minorities are all real things. A “clear vote on a clear question” would trigger discussions, not secession. The fantasies on this issue, now being fuelled not just by the Parti Quebecois but by the NDP in their “Sherbrooke Declaration”, have to be understood as pandering, an appeasement defies logic and constitutional reason.

It’s time, as Dion would say, to demand clarity from these supposed federalist champions. It’s time for Liberals to embrace our identity and stand up as the unapologetic federalist champions. On the constitution, on House of Commons representation, on language rights.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Is she still Nycole from the Bloc?

Who says political summers need to be boring? A well-timed leak to the Globe and Mail about new NDP interim leader Nycole Turmel certainly livened things up, with the revelation that Turmel was very recently a member of two Quebec sovereigntist parties, quitting the Bloc Quebecois just weeks before she became an NDP candidate for the last election, and only promising to quit the other yesterday.

Party-switching is certainly no rarity these days in Canadian politics, and that’s fine. The key for me is to explain how you got from A to B and let the people decide. As long as the people have the information, they can make an informed decision on the person’s motivations. For me, I’ll accept a well-reasoned ideological move but frown on a move motivated purely by political opportunism or expediency. In Turmel’s case, it’s hard to argue in the context of the time that being an NDP candidate in Quebec was the expedient choice. But everyone has their own criteria.

This apparently was an issue discussed in Turmel’s riding during the campaign to some extent so that test may be met, although I find the explanations she’s offering now (she joined and donated to help a friend), her overlapping BQ/NDP memberships, and the membership in Québec solidaire, somewhat less than compelling. I’ll let others dwell on them, though.

What would primarily be an issue for the people of Hull-Alymer gained national import when Jack Layton made her his pick for interim leader of the official opposition. It's a position of national leadership. But for me, this is less about Turmel (who is essentially a placeholder until either Layton returns, or doesn't) and more about the fuzziness of the NDP’s position on Quebec, and its approach to federalism.

There are many Turmels in the new NDP caucus, many MPs who were either avowed sovereigntists or, like Turmel, at least members of sovereigntist parties, and recently so. This flirting with Quebec nationalism is dangerous; just ask Brian Mulroney. And I was no fan of the approach Jean Lapierre brought to my Liberals. As I’ve written previously, the NDP seems determined to promote one vision of federalism in Quebec, and one in the rest of Canada. They continue to ignore the undeniable gulf between their Sherbrooke Declaration and the Clarity Act.

I’m less concerned about Turmel’s membership cards (a symptom) than I am the underlying condition: where does the NDP stand on federalism and Quebec nationalism, are they consistent in that position across the country, and is all of their caucus onboard with defending and promoting that position? Until they’re clear on these issues, they’re going to have to continue to deal with flare-ups like this one, because the underlying questions will linger.

And another thing

It has been painful to watch the NDP spin in response to the Turmel story. I found their strategy puzzling from a communications perspective (in their case, I’d have said something like many former BQ/LPC/CPC supported the NDP in Quebec in the last elxn because we were the only party to address their concerns, and then pivot to issues), as it seems to only prolong and elevate the story.

But more than tactics, the most striking thing was how the NDP and its supporters is their utter inability to take a hit. They’re the Official Opposition now. They’re going to be a target and under scrutiny like they never had before. Some times the criticism will be valid. Often, it won’t be. Either way, they’re going to need to grow a thicker skin and learn to role with the punches, or it’s going to be a long four years.

You can defend Turmel’s actions, and feel they are perfectly above-board. But raising the questions raised yesterday is absolutely fair. It is a legitimate story, and the people have the right to an explanation. Provide it, and then move on to your issues. But don't cry that it was raised in the first place. If all is above-board the defensiveness is unnecessary. I read some Turmel defenders cry McCarthyism yesterday, which is beyond ridiculous.

Continually playing the victim will get old fast.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Stéphane Dion speaks on clarity

He hasn't had a super high-profile since he resigned the Liberal leadership, but Stéphane Dion has been keeping busy working on and speaking about the issues he has been passionate about throughout his career.

He recently gave a speech at a conference in Ottawa called "Secession and the Virtues of Clarity" where he gives an overview of international and Canadian law on succession, the examples of Kosovo and Sudan, and the way the way sovereigntist thinking in Quebec has evolved thanks to the 1998 supreme court reference, and the Clarity Act which followed.

Interesting stuff for my fellow political nerds. Click here for the text of the speech.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Sun distorts Rae's position on Quebec arena funding

It wasn't particularly surprising, but I was relieved to learn that Sun Media distorted Bob Rae's position on the possibility of the federal government spending $175 million to help build a professional hockey arena in Quebec City with the goal of bringing the NHL's Nordiques back to the city.

The headline in the Sun chain yesterday, "Hoo-Rae for funding" certainly gave me pause. The article was reporting on a speech Rae gave to a fundraiser on Friday in Montreal, and the lede seemed to report his position quite unequivocally:

Bob Rae has told Liberal party members he backs federal funding for a new arena in Quebec City as long as it’s not the only initiative in the country.

If you read my last post, you'll know that I strongly disagree with that position. And I was surprised, and disappointed, in Bob's apparent position. My curiosity-meter was tweaked though when I went on to read the rest of the Sun story, and found no direct quotes that seemed to support that lede and headline.

The curiosity meter red-lined when I read CTV's story on that same fundraising speech which, surprise surprise, had a much different interpretation of Rae's comments:

Rae also said the Tories should be cautious in considering requests to devote millions of dollars in federal funding to a new hockey arena in Quebec City.

"Mr. Harper's got to understand that this is not just a one off thing that one can do for one city or one franchise. If you're going to have a policy, it's got to be a consistent policy right across the country," Rae said.

Now this position sounds more sensible. While I'd have preferred if he had added "and that's why we can't go funding pro-sports stadiums and arenas, not when we have a deficit and many other more important priorities" perhaps it was felt to be blindingly obvious. And he's absolutely right that you can't play favourites here. If you fund one, you need to fund them all. And how in the heck could we possibly afford that?

Still, the differing Sun and CTV reports raise the question, does Rae support funding the Quebec arena or not? If Sun has it right, why does CTV not mention that certaintly newsworthy fact at all?

Curious to clear this up, I sent Bob a message on Facebook and asked him, did you support funding the Quebec arena as the Sun reported, or urge caution as CTV reported? He replied quite quickly to clear things up:

I urged caution. I never spoke to Sun media. I said Harper needed to understand that this is not a "one off" decision. You can't just dole out money to a commercial arena in Quebec without understanding the implications for the rest of the country.

So it would seem the Sun completely distorted Rae's position, and he did not say let's fund all of them. He said you need to be cautious setting that kind of precedent.

Why torque his comments? Well, I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that the driving force behind bringing the Nordiques back to Quebec, the fellow who would be the biggest beneficiary of a taxpayer-funded Quebec City arena, also happens to own Sun Media, right? Surely they would have mentioned such a conflict in their coverage if it existed, right?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Governments should not fund professional sports stadiums. Period.

While there are many notable differences between Canadians and our American cousins, one interesting one has been that while the Americans have always been eager to throw hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars into sports stadiums where millionaire athletes play for billionaire owners, in Canada we’d always expected pro-sports to pay its own way. It has been an interesting dichotomy, particularly given the stereotype of Canadian interventionists vs. American free-market worshipers.

This noteable difference, however, may soon evaporate, if special interests in Quebec get there way. Apparently Quebecor boss Pierre Karl Péladeau wants to bring the NHL’s Nordiques back to Quebec City. So does Quebec City’s mayor. And Jean Charest. So does Stephen Harper. Hell, so do I. I’m not sure many people would object to an NHL team in Quebec. Or Hamilton, Winnipeg or Saskatoon. Let’s give Halifax a team too, while we’re at it.

Of course, the odds of an NHL led by Gary Bettman ever doing this are astronomical. But that hasn’t stopped Quebec from channeling Field of Dreams and deciding if they build an arena, a team will come. But instead of the billionare Péladeau opening his wallet, Quebec wants the taxpayers to foot the bill. Fighting for his political life, Premier Jean Charest has promised to kick-in. And now they’re trying to hot the federal government up for a cool $175 million.

Sadly, the Harper Conservatives haven’t dismissed this asinine notion out of hand. Not when there are votes to be bought in the Quebec City region, the one part of the province they still have a shot. Their Quebec MPs are on board (except Maxime Bernier) and Harper is promising arenas for all, while out West his caucus seems aghast.

My Liberals are sadly mixed. Denis Coderre, who inexplicably again has a critic portfolio, is pressuring Harper to fund the arena. Other Liberal MPs, such as Keith Martin and Joyce Murray, have taken to Twitter to oppose the idea.

And then there’s newly-minted deputy Liberal leader Ralph Goodale who, unfortunately, told the media that if Quebec is getting $175 million, that’s cool, but he wants “over” $100 million for a football stadium in Regina.

No, no, NO! The Conservatives are wrong on this, and Liberals like Goodale and Coderre should not be egging them on. The government has no place subsidizing professional sports stadiums. And if you fund one, you’ll have to fund them all. It’s a dangerous precedent we can’t afford to set, particularly in today’s budgetary climate.

This isn’t investment we’re talking about here. It’s subsidy. We’ll never see this money back. If these are economically-viable projects, they wouldn’t need government funding. They would be financed by the private sector. If the private sector won’t fund it, then it’s not a viable project, and all the government funding in the world will only delay the inevitable business failure.

Now known as Rogers Place, Vancouver’s General Motors Place was built in $160 million in 1995 (gee, how’s that for inflation?) and was privately financed by the Griffiths family. Sure, Arthur Griffiths ended-up overleveraging himself by buying an NBA expansion franchise at the same time and ended-up losing it all to John McCaw, but point is he had an economically-viable project and he got it financed privately, without blackmailing the taxpayers for donations.

There’s no reason why Quebec City, Regina, and every other city can’t do the same. And if they can’t, then they must not be able to support a team and probably shouldn’t have one.

I hope the government comes to its senses and kills this thing in its infancy. And I hope the Liberal leadership brings the caucus together, gets everyone on the same page and says a firm No to taxpayer-funded stadiums, wherever they may be.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservative minister calls niqab a mask

In the wake of the story of a Quebec woman who wears a niqab (a head garment which is worn over the entire face with a slit for the eyes) filing a human rights complaint over her expulsion from a French course at a Montreal-area college, federal Conservative Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Josée Verner waded-into the fracas last week.

In an interview with a Quebec City radio station, Verner went on the offensive against Muslim women that choose to wear the niqab. She called it a mask, said she wouldn't open the door to a woman wearing one, nor would she want them using her hypothetical day care centre. She also ponders if they should go to the bank or not:

"It has nothing to do with religious beliefs, even though there's a debate that should take place there," Verner told CHOI-FM in Quebec City. "But quite frankly, for someone who goes around who is quote-unquote masked, no matter what time of day, if someone rang on my door bell wearing a mask, I wouldn't open the door."

"If I was in charge of a daycare, I wouldn't allow a child to leave with someone if I could not see their face," Verner added. "I don't think I'd be able to go into a bank with a mask on my head."

Cultural sensitivity, thy name is Josée Verner. Wonder if she'll be getting a call from an enraged Jason Kenney...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Thomas Mulcair: Looking out for number one

Future NDP leadership candidate (assuming Martin Cauchon doesn't defeat him in the next election) Thomas Mulcair asked the following question of the government he's propping-up in question period on Monday, regarding the HST:

Thomas Mulcair (NDP): (Voice of Translator): Mr. Speaker, while the Conservatives are busying themselves harmonizing sax tax increases in Ontario and British Columbia, Quebec is still waiting. Still waiting for the compensation it's owed after having harmonizeed its tax in THE '90s. 6 billion here. Instead of his usual boasting, can the minister of national revenue for once in his life answer the following question: When will Quebec finally be compensated?

Here Mulcair, as the NDP often does, is jumping on a BQ talking-point to try to curry favour in Quebec. If Ontario and BC are getting money to harmonize sales taxes now, why not Quebec, he asks, which harmonized some years ago.

Even if you accepted retroactive compensation as valid and not a cash-grab, why is Mulcair, whose party staunchly opposes the HST, not arguing for retroactive compensation for the other provinces that have previously harmonized?

Why isn't Mulcair demanding compensation for New Brunswick or Newfoundland? And why isn't he demanding compensation for Nova Scotia, home of NDP Premier Darrel Dexter?

No, it seems Mulcair is only concerned about Quebec, and not the Atlantic HST provinces. And I'm sure it has nothing to do with his Quebec seat being in trouble, and his not so secret dreams of replacing Jack Layton being on the rocks...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Coderre quits. Don't let the door, etc.

I had family visiting from BC last week so I’ve been on a blogging hiatus, and now that I’m back one of the posts I’d planned to write was one congratulating Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff for listening to both the grassroots and senior members of his party about the Outrement situation and making the right call by allowing Martin Cauchon to contest an open nomination in the riding and Nathalie Le Prohon to do the same in Jeanne-Le Ber. Now, things have developed further this morning with Coderre announcing his resignation as defence critic and Quebec lieutenant:

"It is a tough decision, a very emotional one that I have to make today," Coderre told a Montreal news conference on Monday. "But I took four days on my own...and I thought that I don't have any more the moral authority to remain as the Quebec lieutenant."

First, to the earlier doings. As I wrote earlier, the initial decision to not allow Cauchon to seek an open nomination in Outremont was a mistake. He’s exactly the kind of experienced, progressive candidate we need on the team and allowing him to seek the nomination in his old riding should have been a no-brainer. Ignatieff erred initially in backing Coderre’s decision to block Cauchon, particularly given that Coderre has seemed more interested in preparing for his own future leadership campaign and blocking potential rivals then in doing his job, organizing Quebec for Ignatieff and the Liberal Party for the next election.

After a major outcry from the grassroots, from the blogsphere, from senior Liberals and even Members of Parliament, Ignatieff did exactly the right thing in re-visiting the situation, and allowing Cauchon and Le Prohon to contest open nominations. It was a victory for the party as a whole, and an example of real leadership by Ignatieff: that he’s willing to listen to criticism and reverse an incorrect decision when a compelling argument is made. I was a little surprised, frankly, but very pleasantly so.

Now, as for Coderre’s resignation today, frankly, it was inevitable and necessary. He really had little choice. Ignatieff reversed his call on Outremont and Cauchon. And while Ignatieff made the right call in doing so, it did cut Coderre’s legs out from under him, and would have left him largely impotent in the Quebec organizer role, unable to speak with the weight of the leader. He had to resign.

And let me say that I, for one (of many, many Liberals), couldn’t be happier. We’re going to read many pundits opining how Coderre’s departure is a bad thing for the Liberals, that it will mean trouble organizing in Quebec, that it speaks ill of Ignatieff’s leadership, and so on. That’s all bollocks, and amusing given the low opinion all the critics actually hold of Coderre.

Coderre was an embarrassment as defence critic, unloved and running his own agenda as Quebec lieutenant, and his departure from both positions will be a positive for the party. Instead of someone who has been dividing Quebec Liberals, trying to muscle aside rivals, trying to push out incumbents, we can have someone working to build a more open and inclusive party in the province, someone who will work to build the organization and find the best candidates, period.

This is all very inside baseball. Canadians don’t care who the Liberal Party’s Quebec lieutenant is. The pundits will bray, but it’s just white noise and they’ll move on soon enough. Internally, however, a divisive force has been removed from the equation and that will result in a stronger Quebec organization, better able to fight the next election.

In the long game, this is a good day for the Liberal Party. And I know very few Liberals who would disagree.

Au revoir, Denis. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Michael Ignatieff tours Quebec

Le Soleil reports Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff will be touring Quebec this weekend (via Google Translate):

The leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, Michael Ignatieff, visiting two ridings in eastern Quebec Saturday and Sunday, during its summer tour of regions.

It will stay in the district of Haute-Gaspésie-Matapédia-Matane-Mitis Saturday with his Liberal candidate Nancy Charest. Sunday, he will move to the riding of Gaspésie-Îles-de-la-Madeleine, where the candidate is not yet known. He arrived in Gaspé at 9am and will be received at City Hall by Mayor François Roussy.

He then will fly to Bonaventure, and went to Cascapedia-Saint-Jules visit the Museum of Cascapedia River, accompanied by the Liberal organizer Rémi Bujold. He will participate in the late afternoon at a meeting partisan Bonaventure.

According to Jean-François Latortue, spokesman for Mr. Ignatieff, the Liberals, both of these constituencies are prenables.

I hear his whirlwind Quebec tour will include Barrie, Mont-Joli, Amqui, Matane, Gaspé, Cascapédia—St. Jules and Bonaventure.

I wonder if Stephen Harper will be touring Quebec this summer? I hear they just love him there...

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservatives keep digging in Quebec

Macleans has an interesting article on the Conservative Party's increasing woes in Quebec. And between interesting anecdotes like this:

Meanwhile, organizers were scurrying across the room, pleading with attendees to keep quiet during the PM’s speech. Despite shelling out $150 for the privilege, diners didn’t appear particularly interested in listening to what Harper had to say. In fact, Harper didn’t even get the evening’s warmest reception. That privilege went to Maxime Bernier.

And advice Harper the egomaniac is unlikely to ever take, like this:

Bob Plamondon, a longtime Conservative and the author of Blue Thunder: The Truth about Conservatives from Macdonald to Harper, goes even further. He says Harper needs to strike a power-sharing agreement with someone able to countenance the prime minister’s sharply partisan instincts when it comes to Quebec. It’s the only way, Plamondon says, for Harper to avoid making missteps like those on culture and young offenders that are widely credited with sinking his chances of a majority in the last election campaign.

What struck me as most interesting though, as the article outlines how the Harper Conservatives continue to do much the same things that got them in trouble there in the first place, reinforcing the negative perceptions of the Conservative brand, was this observation from Harper's Quebec boss:

While it may seem counter-intuitive for the Tories to return to the ideological territory that may have played a role in derailing their campaign in 2008, a spokesperson for Conservative MP Christian Paradis, Harper’s Quebec lieutenant, says the party plans to stick with the tough-on-crime pitch to Quebecers.

Do they think Quebecers are going to suddenly do a 180 on the issue? Did the Conservatives learn nothing from the last campaign? It's like Harper is saying to Quebecers: "It's not me, it's you. I'm right, you change."

Honestly, I thought he was smarter than that. But apparently I gave him too much credit, as he's continuing down that same road again. Which, frankly, is just fine with me.

Amusing that Bernier got a warmer reception than Harper. Bernier might be the party's only MP left in the province after the next election, the way they're going.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservative minister wants a spring election

Conservative revenue minister Jean-Pierre Blackburn has been in the Quebec media pleading with the BQ to not bring down his Harper Conservatives this fall, saying an election right now isn't right for Quebecers. Fair enough. But what's interesting is Blackburn has suggested a desired window for the next election: he'd like one in the spring:

(Via Google Translate:)

"The interest of Quebec, it is precisely that there are no elections in the fall. The right window is in a budget and the budget will be next spring," he added.

Most of the piece was same 'ol, but I did find it interesting mentioned spring as the time for an election. I haven't seem the Conservatives giving a prefered timeline in the English media. And I'm sure they could have a different story come spring, should it come to that. Odd though that Blackburn is boxing them into a date, and that the message seems to be Quebec-only.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Conservative support in Quebec at its lowest since 2005: Leger

A new Quebec-only poll released today by Leger for Le Devoir shows the Conservatives trailing the NDP in Quebec, polling at their lowest levels in the province since 2005. The Liberals are down slightly (within the margin) and are now tied with the BQ in the province.

The numbers:

Liberals: 35%
BQ: 35%
NDP: 15%
Con: 11%

The translated analysis from Leger:

The slide began in an election campaign last fall to increase this spring, says the analyst Christian Bourque, Léger Marketing. "Two factors have contributed to the fall of the Conservatives in Quebec," notes M. Bourque. The first is an image problem, fueled by several events during the election campaign, including planned cuts in the culture. The second factor is the economic crisis.

"Harper repeated throughout the campaign that everything was fine and that Canada was immune to the crisis.That plays against him now."

And more from Steve, naturelment.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Reading the tea leaves

From tomorrow's calendar of media events, this will be interesting to observers of the Quebec scene:

QUEBEC _ Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff attends a Fete nationale event hosted by Quebec Premier Jean Charest. (11:45 a.m. at Musee des beaux-arts du Quebec, Parc des Champs-de-Bataille )

Meanwhile, on the comedy circuit:

VANCOUVER _ Senator Mike Duffy discusses the Conservative government's response to the global recession during the Fraser Institute's series, "Behind the Spin." (5:30 p.m. at VOYA Restaurant and Lounge, 1177 Melville Street)

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

From the own-ad hating Conservative files...

The latest high-profile Conservative to speak-out against their nasty negative attack ads is Luc Harvey, who will soon have lots of company as a former Conservative MP from Quebec:

Luc Harvey, the only Conservative to lose a seat in the federal election, says his party isn't doing enough to explain to voters what's being done to address the economic crisis.

"That leaves the opposition with the opportunity to define the government," said Harvey, now a business owner.

Some of the money poured into an expensive ad campaign aimed at softening Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff's numbers might have been better directed at selling Conservative policy in Quebec, Harvey said.

"The Conservative party has ads to try and define Michael Ignatieff, but on the other hand they let the opposition define the government on policy, and I think right now the opposition is more effective than the ads, at least in Quebec."

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

ADQ doesn't want Harper staffer to lead it

I mentioned a few weeks ago that failed Conservative candidate Myriam Taschereau has resigned her position as a senior communications adviser in Stephen Harper's PMO to run for the leadership of the l'Action démocratique du Québec (ADQ).

It seems her read of Quebec's political situation was just as sound as the rest of her PMO colleagues though, as Quebec media reports she's dropping out of the ADQ race. She had the support of Conservative rainmaker and Harper fundraiser Senator Leo Housakos, but she didn't have the support of ADQ organizers and membership at large.

Makes one wonder just how many friends the Harper crowd has left in Quebec, if even the ADQ won't take them seriously.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Stephen Harper is as popular in Quebec as Stephane Dion was...

... and Harper is trending downward from Dion's basement popularity number. That's my take-away from today's CROP poll for Quebec.

The horserace numbers show the BQ having regained first place from the Liberals, while the NDP and Conservatives remained largely unchanged. Here's the numbers, with the % change from CROP's poll last month in brackets:

BQ: 36 (+5)
Liberal: 32 (-5)
Conservative: 15 (-)
NDP: 12 (-)

Why the flip in BQ and Liberal #s? Here's the translated CROP analysis:

But Wilkins says this fall by 5 points in one month is not necessarily disastrous for the troops of Michael Ignatieff.

"When our survey was made in April, it was a special time," says the analyst. It was really when Mr. Ignatieff was very, very present in Quebec. There was a strong media presence, he was at Everybody's talking about, there was the launch of his book, his speech in Laval was fairly recent. The charm of Ignatieff operation was underway."

"This month, it's as if things had stabilized," she notes. "There is a rise in the PLC since January and the party has become the alternative to the Bloc in Quebec, as far as the federalist option."

Seems reasonable. The poll also notes the Conservatives have slipped to third in their Quebec City stronghold, where interestingly the Liberals lead at 33%. Hmm.

But here's what really caught my eye in this poll:

Finally, Mr. Harper received his worst score at the question of who would make the best Prime Minister of Canada. He garnered 15% of the vote, against 39% for Michael Ignatieff and 21% for Jack Layton. The last federal leader to obtain 15% was Stéphane Dion, a few days before the Conservatives do not trigger the last election.

Ouch. And Harper still has room to fall.
____
PS. Check-out my entry for the YLC's positive politics ad challenge, "Is this your Canada?"

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Quebecers seem to like Michael's french

A new Quebec-only poll out from Leger Marketing for Le Devoir shows Stephen Harper's nasty attack ads appear to have done nothing to help Conservative fortunes in the province, with the NDP now polling ahead of the Conservatives in Quebec and the Liberals outpacing the BQ for the lead.

The Leger numbers put support at Liberals 37%, BQ 33%, NDP 14& and Conservatives 13%.

Amongst Francophones, the BQ leads at 40%, followed by the Liberals at 32%, the NDP at 14% and the Conservatives at 11%.

Another interesting statistic. Leger reports 71% of Quebecers are dissatisfied with the Harper government, while just 21% are satisfied. Leger notes that even at the height of the sponsorship scandal, during the Gomery Commission, Paul Martin's government bottomed-out at 36% satisfaction.

Here's some google-translated analysis from Le Devoir:

Michael Ignatieff is still driven by a favorable wind, according to Christian Bourque, vice-president of research at Léger Makerting. "There is truly a pro-liberal movement in Quebec. The rise has been constant since December. There is a novelty, people want to discover Ignatieff. It also benefits the difficulties of the Conservative Party and the fact that the Bloc Quebecois seems to offer nothing new. "

According to Leger Marketing, the discourse of centrist and moderate like Michael Ignatieff Quebec. "It is not a province on the right or left. It is a province that loves the extreme center. Ignatieff is designed just for the moment, "says Bourque.

(snip)

"It's like the bond of trust between the Harper government and Quebecers had been broken," said Christian Bourque. An accumulation of factors makes Quebecers say they do most conservatives. This is not one thing in particular, but several elements."

Leger finishes by cautioning not to write the Conservatives off in Quebec, and I'll agree with that. They're a tricky, wily bunch. Leger also notes the Conservative fundraising rally in the province last week. L. Ian MacDonald has some notes of caution about reading to much into that "success" however:

No one from the entourage of Premier Jean Charest, or the Quebec Liberal Party, was on the VIP guest list. How stupid was that? Pretty stupid, since the ADQ can't deliver anything to Harper, and Charest controls the only federalist ground game in Quebec, a wondrous thing called the Big Red Machine. The Quebec guys around Harper continue to get it wrong. Either they don't get it, or they don't care. Or they're just plain stupid.

Chantal Hebert also had thoughts.

My thoughts? There's real dissatisfaction with the Harper Conservatives in Quebec, and there has long been a certain pool of people that aren't BQ fans but vote for them for a lack of compelling alternatives. The Michael Ignatieff-led Liberals are now seen by Quebecers as a compelling alternatives, and increasingly they're willing to give the Liberals a chance again.

How firm their conviction will be remains to be seen, and will be determined by our actions and our policies as we begin to roll them out going forward. Remember, they gave the Conservatives a chance too, and the Cons blew it. Right now, however, they're open to us, and that's a substantial shift.

____
PS. Check-out my entry for the YLC's positive politics ad challenge, "Is this your Canada?"

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Harper aide leaves PMO to seek ADQ leadership

Very interesting news from the french-language media, who are reporting that a former candidate for the Conservatives in Quebec, Myriam Taschereau, has resigned her position as a communications staffer in Stephen Harper's PMO to run for the leadership of the l'Action démocratique du Québec (ADQ).

From CP, via Google Translate:

Former Conservative Candidate (PC) in Quebec, Myriam Taschereau, resigned Wednesday evening from his office in the Communications team of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Former Conservative Candidate (PC) in Quebec, Myriam Taschereau, resigned Wednesday evening from his office in the Communications team of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Ms. Tashereau said she thought the opportunity to present his candidacy in the race for the leadership of the Action démocratique du Québec (ADQ). This intention has sparked unease among some members of the bodyguards of Prime Minister Harper.

Ms. Taschereau could soon announce it officially in the race for leadership of the ADQ. She had been beaten by Christiane Gagnon Bloc during the last federal election. She was then hired by Stephen Harper as a communications adviser in the cabinet of Prime Minister.

And I can see why Harper's bodyguards would be concerned with a senior Harper communications adviser going to run for the right-wing ADQ, a ruderless sinking ship that has espoused some rather contreversial policies under Mario Dumont.

The Conservatives enough problems with Jean Charest's Liberals already, and this won't help or endear them to those Charest organizers they're going to need to salvage their dismal Quebec numbers. The ADQ has no machine that can help Harper, as their performance in the last campaign shows.

Très intéressant.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Speaking of post-referendum archival footage of now party leaders

Even those with only basic french skills will find Stephen Harper's comments interesting here, in light of his subsequent actions.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers