As we get into the Christmas period, all parties vow to spend it with their families and stay off the campaign trail. Not sure how well they will stick to this, but let's watch.
I liked Martin's approach to this announcement: "My wife says I'll be spending my time at home" or some such comment. Nice slightly mysogynistic, old 'ball and chain' comment. Way to win the votes of younger folk.
Harper just grins his creepy grin and talks about home and family because he figures that's what his religious right base is looking for.
Layton and his wife are both running, so I suspect they will both be stapling signs to posts between gift wrapping.
I'll be interested to see how the start of January plays out.
Wednesday
Heating Up the Campaign Trail
Is that Snow melting that I see? With recent heat on the campaign trail, I would expect it to be. The media attention is still being driven my Mr. Harper it seems. Often coverage will start with one of his statements, and occasionally contrast someone elses position on the topic.
Today though, US Ambassador Wilkins has weighed into the election - no doubt on direct guidance from the US Whitehouse administration. He's made fairly poorly worded comments about Martin (not mentioned by name but clear) dissing the US for political points.
The motivation, some news sources are saying, is that the Bushites would like to see a more conservative government here (duh) aka, the other right wing party, that of Mr. Harper. Ambassador Wilkins' comments about criticising your friends while expecting respect from them are rather misplaced on three fronts.
First of all, the only respect Canadians have been demanding from the US is respect for very specific trade agreements, on all rulings have supported us, and on which the US continues to renege. They on the otherhand are PO'd at the fact that many other countries have reduced respect for them given recent foreign-policy and environmental decisions.
Second, in the face of hostile and illegal US handling of our softwood lumber trade, if our PM didn't express disapproval, he would be severly beaten up by voters and the opposition parties.
Finally, if the US administrations goal is to undermine the Liberal campaign by expressing disapproval, this is another of their patented misunderstandings of what goes on outside their borders. Showing disapproval for Martin, and approval of Harper is a very large barrage of nails in the Conservative election coffin. That's majority-making material for Liberal election outcomes.
Meanwhile, Liberals are taking heat for an aide's comment that if Harper's $100 per child payment to parents went ahead, there would be nothing stopping it from being spent on "beer and popcorn." Am I the only one who's going "wha???" Not because the statment colloquially captures an accurate issue about some percentage of the recipients using the funds poorly, but more because this is a Liberal comment trashing a potential poorly directed social payment proposed by conservatives. Will the real conservative party please stand up! Strange roll reversal.
In spite of media attempts to make the comment catch fire, my perception is that it doesn't have any legs, and the story will fade out quickly.
One last thought on the US-Canada relations front - I regularly check various global newspapers - including a couple of US ones - the LA Times, NY Times. Coverage there of the Montreal Conference statements about the US do not single out Canada as trashing them, but rather highlight a global condemnation of the lack of American alignment with global enviro-movement. Canadian Media should look a bit more at how our relations with our southern friends are playing from other perspectives.
Green Party coverage on CBC last night was suprising. What sticks with me, not much other than that they were covering the Green Party. I guess there are a couple of points. The Deputy-Leader of the Greens pulled a full-stronach and crossed the virtual "floor" to run for the Liberals. The Green's leader Jim Harris (I had to surf off to greenparty.ca to get that name) is saying that this is a compliment to the party's strength and ability to drive the issues that a prominent member of their organization was snatched by the party in power. I can kind of see that.... with a bit more success along those lines though, there won't be a green party left!
I also retained the info that the Greens had apparently run a candidate in every riding in the last election! I was suprised to hear that. Presumably they have no federal funding, since they didn't get any seats, so to do that on their own (donated) coin is impressive... kind of smells of grsss roots support. This immediately made me think the funding laws need fundamental changes, as the Bloc must get a big bag of funding, but with concentration of their members in one geographic area, that kind of seems unfair that such a small portion of their budget will be needed for travel!
The final point I wanted to make on this is that it makes a strong case for revisiting our method of voting. Something that takes into account people's second choice, or maybe their "don't want" choice seems strongly needed here for some real democracy. Imagine a situation where all voters are leaning toward the left, with a small portion thinking right. With (theoretically) 3 parties splitting the left vote, and one party on the extreme right, we could end up with a right-ist government that is supported by about 20% of Canadians.
What if we had a system where you voted for someone and against someone in your riding? Then you add up all the "fors" and subtract the "againsts" and you end up with a winner. At least if everyone has an "Everyone but Bob" sentiment we don't get stuck with Bob.
The only guys I didn't mention this go around is the NDP. My only retained thoughts there are that they seem to have a pretty decent ad campaign, certainly compared to that high-school project Conservative crap, and the testimonial based Liberal "forget-about-our-leader-for-a-minute-won't-ya?" campaign. They're also doing one other thing good, they're not getting any foot-in-mouth time. That's a good steady-as-she-goes approach.
The Conservative ads have one smart element - the cheesy trailer-sign "Stand up for Canada" idea. Regardless of the jingo-istic, manipulative, us-and-them nature of the comment, I think the device is a good one, as it can spawn people who do that to their own signs, thus creating some grass-roots momentum for them. They really need to lose the format of the rest of the ad though - whoof.
Today though, US Ambassador Wilkins has weighed into the election - no doubt on direct guidance from the US Whitehouse administration. He's made fairly poorly worded comments about Martin (not mentioned by name but clear) dissing the US for political points.
The motivation, some news sources are saying, is that the Bushites would like to see a more conservative government here (duh) aka, the other right wing party, that of Mr. Harper. Ambassador Wilkins' comments about criticising your friends while expecting respect from them are rather misplaced on three fronts.
First of all, the only respect Canadians have been demanding from the US is respect for very specific trade agreements, on all rulings have supported us, and on which the US continues to renege. They on the otherhand are PO'd at the fact that many other countries have reduced respect for them given recent foreign-policy and environmental decisions.
Second, in the face of hostile and illegal US handling of our softwood lumber trade, if our PM didn't express disapproval, he would be severly beaten up by voters and the opposition parties.
Finally, if the US administrations goal is to undermine the Liberal campaign by expressing disapproval, this is another of their patented misunderstandings of what goes on outside their borders. Showing disapproval for Martin, and approval of Harper is a very large barrage of nails in the Conservative election coffin. That's majority-making material for Liberal election outcomes.
Meanwhile, Liberals are taking heat for an aide's comment that if Harper's $100 per child payment to parents went ahead, there would be nothing stopping it from being spent on "beer and popcorn." Am I the only one who's going "wha???" Not because the statment colloquially captures an accurate issue about some percentage of the recipients using the funds poorly, but more because this is a Liberal comment trashing a potential poorly directed social payment proposed by conservatives. Will the real conservative party please stand up! Strange roll reversal.
In spite of media attempts to make the comment catch fire, my perception is that it doesn't have any legs, and the story will fade out quickly.
One last thought on the US-Canada relations front - I regularly check various global newspapers - including a couple of US ones - the LA Times, NY Times. Coverage there of the Montreal Conference statements about the US do not single out Canada as trashing them, but rather highlight a global condemnation of the lack of American alignment with global enviro-movement. Canadian Media should look a bit more at how our relations with our southern friends are playing from other perspectives.
Green Party coverage on CBC last night was suprising. What sticks with me, not much other than that they were covering the Green Party. I guess there are a couple of points. The Deputy-Leader of the Greens pulled a full-stronach and crossed the virtual "floor" to run for the Liberals. The Green's leader Jim Harris (I had to surf off to greenparty.ca to get that name) is saying that this is a compliment to the party's strength and ability to drive the issues that a prominent member of their organization was snatched by the party in power. I can kind of see that.... with a bit more success along those lines though, there won't be a green party left!
I also retained the info that the Greens had apparently run a candidate in every riding in the last election! I was suprised to hear that. Presumably they have no federal funding, since they didn't get any seats, so to do that on their own (donated) coin is impressive... kind of smells of grsss roots support. This immediately made me think the funding laws need fundamental changes, as the Bloc must get a big bag of funding, but with concentration of their members in one geographic area, that kind of seems unfair that such a small portion of their budget will be needed for travel!
The final point I wanted to make on this is that it makes a strong case for revisiting our method of voting. Something that takes into account people's second choice, or maybe their "don't want" choice seems strongly needed here for some real democracy. Imagine a situation where all voters are leaning toward the left, with a small portion thinking right. With (theoretically) 3 parties splitting the left vote, and one party on the extreme right, we could end up with a right-ist government that is supported by about 20% of Canadians.
What if we had a system where you voted for someone and against someone in your riding? Then you add up all the "fors" and subtract the "againsts" and you end up with a winner. At least if everyone has an "Everyone but Bob" sentiment we don't get stuck with Bob.
The only guys I didn't mention this go around is the NDP. My only retained thoughts there are that they seem to have a pretty decent ad campaign, certainly compared to that high-school project Conservative crap, and the testimonial based Liberal "forget-about-our-leader-for-a-minute-won't-ya?" campaign. They're also doing one other thing good, they're not getting any foot-in-mouth time. That's a good steady-as-she-goes approach.
The Conservative ads have one smart element - the cheesy trailer-sign "Stand up for Canada" idea. Regardless of the jingo-istic, manipulative, us-and-them nature of the comment, I think the device is a good one, as it can spawn people who do that to their own signs, thus creating some grass-roots momentum for them. They really need to lose the format of the rest of the ad though - whoof.
Sunday
Pre-Christmas Strategies Laid Out
So it's been going now for almost two weeks -and the path forward is reasonably clear. The challenge is that all the parties see the pre-Christmas period as a bit of a throw-away. They don't want to be seen as complacent - because they know the others will accuse them as being disinterested. They don't want to lay out their entire platform, because they still want to have some stuff to announce in early January to garner some headlines.
But, there is the first debate coming up in Vancouver shortly, and it's a bit tough to go into a debate without some planks in your platform, or you won't have much to stand on when it comes to pushing your points. Lets hope the first debate can be moderated with a bit of structure and not turn into an exercise in simultaneous talking.
The media coverage has been as entertaining as the party performance. Global news seems to be a broken record, as probably the most biased "news" coverage in the country (from a so-called Nation-wide station) they are playing a single track. Each newscast seems to say "The Liberals are slipping in the polls" and then they play tons of Harper announcements and get (vaguely supportive) reactions. CTV and CBC coverage seems to be more balanced, but CBC policy seems to be talking out both sides of their mouth. I applaud their idea in the last election to not focus on the Polls, as that approach can create the old self-fulfilling-prophesy-syndrome. And, of course, that is why some polling companies seem to push their preferred parties. Announce it and the public will say "Jeeze, the Liberals are slipping - no way I'm going to support those losers."
But, while they started their cowverage off saying they would again refrain from reporting on Polls once the campaign started, I seem to see a lot of poll coverage on their organs. The CBC One radio coverage even started with poll info on the News lead-in at least once in the last few days.
Kudo's to Mike Duffy on CTV for commenting on the Conservative lame-o advertising. I've been pointing out how the Harper ads look like crap. Some deer-in-the-headlights actor playing a woman journalist 'interviewing' Harper, and graphics, effects and copy that sound like it was a high school project.
Mike Duffy was commenting on the Conservative advertising in Quebec, trying to counter the Bloc, and mentioned that the ads in English Canada look like they were put together by a group of kids in advertising school. Glad to see that others are noting that.
Not sure what kind of a message it sends to voters to appear amateurish and klunky, when you want to project that you can run the country. That's probably the biggest benefit to the Liberals out their right now, in my humble opinion.
I think it is the intangible sense of a parties style that makes or breaks the shiftable vote. There is a big chunk of voters out there who will vote a certain way barring anything but a major meltdown. When it comes to the crucial Ontario vote (in terms of swinging the size of the coming minority), credibility based on subtle perception will be most important.
So in closing this brief commentary, here's my perspective of how things are looking currently.
Conservatives: Awkward, walking on eggshells, throwing out announcements willy-nilly, most of which are based on news-hooks and sound bites. Driving the media seems to be working in terms of getting lead-story time.
Liberals: Project the we're busy governing, and are the only competant party look. Largely keeping the powder dry until after Xmas, and setting up photo op's that paint a flattering picture
NDP: The usual differentiation strategy - we're not like those guys - with an astute chunk of milking the influence they were able to weild in the minority parliament.
Greens: Hey we're here and we don't get much respect. They seem to be saying we're more than just the environment, but they are not punching through with the big messages. They need some good beefy, solid maple in their platform. Two or three planks that aren't overtly environment, but that they can repeat to the point of nausea, where-upon the media will finally get it.
Bloc: Just keeps hyping the big bad liberals: "THEY" did this to "US" The federalist forces really need to find a sensitive way to say that the "THEY" in this case is a bunch of corrupt Quebecers. Put in the Bloc and you can just as easily have another big raft of corrupt Quebecers. Liberals should point out that they will be extra careful going forward, given their current black eyes, and will thus be more squeaky clean than anyone else.
My biggest gripe this week: All the Quebec coverage is about the Bloc. I've seen no coverage of alternatives in prominent ridings. The media doesn't need to take a pro-federalist stance (although a little bias in that direction would be reasonable - as reasonable as Global pushing Harper so hard). Just having balanced coverage of the fact that there are other people running in Quebec would be nice. WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? We never get to see.
A Bientot....
But, there is the first debate coming up in Vancouver shortly, and it's a bit tough to go into a debate without some planks in your platform, or you won't have much to stand on when it comes to pushing your points. Lets hope the first debate can be moderated with a bit of structure and not turn into an exercise in simultaneous talking.
The media coverage has been as entertaining as the party performance. Global news seems to be a broken record, as probably the most biased "news" coverage in the country (from a so-called Nation-wide station) they are playing a single track. Each newscast seems to say "The Liberals are slipping in the polls" and then they play tons of Harper announcements and get (vaguely supportive) reactions. CTV and CBC coverage seems to be more balanced, but CBC policy seems to be talking out both sides of their mouth. I applaud their idea in the last election to not focus on the Polls, as that approach can create the old self-fulfilling-prophesy-syndrome. And, of course, that is why some polling companies seem to push their preferred parties. Announce it and the public will say "Jeeze, the Liberals are slipping - no way I'm going to support those losers."
But, while they started their cowverage off saying they would again refrain from reporting on Polls once the campaign started, I seem to see a lot of poll coverage on their organs. The CBC One radio coverage even started with poll info on the News lead-in at least once in the last few days.
Kudo's to Mike Duffy on CTV for commenting on the Conservative lame-o advertising. I've been pointing out how the Harper ads look like crap. Some deer-in-the-headlights actor playing a woman journalist 'interviewing' Harper, and graphics, effects and copy that sound like it was a high school project.
Mike Duffy was commenting on the Conservative advertising in Quebec, trying to counter the Bloc, and mentioned that the ads in English Canada look like they were put together by a group of kids in advertising school. Glad to see that others are noting that.
Not sure what kind of a message it sends to voters to appear amateurish and klunky, when you want to project that you can run the country. That's probably the biggest benefit to the Liberals out their right now, in my humble opinion.
I think it is the intangible sense of a parties style that makes or breaks the shiftable vote. There is a big chunk of voters out there who will vote a certain way barring anything but a major meltdown. When it comes to the crucial Ontario vote (in terms of swinging the size of the coming minority), credibility based on subtle perception will be most important.
So in closing this brief commentary, here's my perspective of how things are looking currently.
Conservatives: Awkward, walking on eggshells, throwing out announcements willy-nilly, most of which are based on news-hooks and sound bites. Driving the media seems to be working in terms of getting lead-story time.
Liberals: Project the we're busy governing, and are the only competant party look. Largely keeping the powder dry until after Xmas, and setting up photo op's that paint a flattering picture
NDP: The usual differentiation strategy - we're not like those guys - with an astute chunk of milking the influence they were able to weild in the minority parliament.
Greens: Hey we're here and we don't get much respect. They seem to be saying we're more than just the environment, but they are not punching through with the big messages. They need some good beefy, solid maple in their platform. Two or three planks that aren't overtly environment, but that they can repeat to the point of nausea, where-upon the media will finally get it.
Bloc: Just keeps hyping the big bad liberals: "THEY" did this to "US" The federalist forces really need to find a sensitive way to say that the "THEY" in this case is a bunch of corrupt Quebecers. Put in the Bloc and you can just as easily have another big raft of corrupt Quebecers. Liberals should point out that they will be extra careful going forward, given their current black eyes, and will thus be more squeaky clean than anyone else.
My biggest gripe this week: All the Quebec coverage is about the Bloc. I've seen no coverage of alternatives in prominent ridings. The media doesn't need to take a pro-federalist stance (although a little bias in that direction would be reasonable - as reasonable as Global pushing Harper so hard). Just having balanced coverage of the fact that there are other people running in Quebec would be nice. WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES? We never get to see.
A Bientot....
Monday
The Voting - Parliamentary Democracy Gears Turn
In some ways, irregardless of your political stripes, these are the most exciting days of a Parliamentary Democracy. The wheels turn to set about a potential change in government. Roles that are otherwise window-dressing actually have a function and we see that a few dozen millions can live in relative harmony and bring about a structured revisiting of their system of government.
So a vote is on, and the outcome is essentially a foregone conclusion. Non-confidence in the reigning party will be confirmed, following the motion served last week by The Conservatives and NDP (Moved by Harper, seconded by Layton). The outcome is that with the non-confidence vote lost by the governing party, the Governor-General (the Queen's representative in Canada) will confer with the Prime Minister and in that process will call for a new election. The writ, as we say, will be dropped.
She, (the GG) can actually do something else if she wanted - she could say, "You conservatives, NDP's and Bloc's go form a new government." But that's very unlikely, and so we'll end up going to the polls in early January.
Voting on the non-confidence motion gets underway just before 7:00pm tonight, and doesn't take long, as members simply stand to be counted and then we know.
Phoning it in For the First Month
It's generally conceeded that the parties will not be going full tilt until after the Christmas season. There will be some token campaigning, but they anticipate a lot of doors closed in their faces leading up to the holidays, and so will wait until afterwards to start really pounding the pavement.
The first spins of the session will have to be seen. We still see the Liberals saying "Canadians don't want an election" Canadians generally don't seem to care much when it happens. The opposition parties point out that they'd like a non-confidence motion now, and an election later (with some governing going ahead for a month or so).
They have a point, I suppose - the Liberals - that once confidence has failed, the concept of continuing to legislate further business is a bit of a stretch to the parliametary system.
Enjoying the Machinations
So meanwhile, enjoy the steps as they play out. I think it's the best part of the system, steeped in tradition, no gunshots invoved or people lined up against garden walls. The PM should have a speech for the press shortly about his chat with the GG, there should be statements that punch the primary slogans and points of the respective campaigns, and lawn signs will start sprouting around town.
I'd recommend a sign from each of the Liberals and the Greens for your lawn - the colours will be particularly festive. You can worry about the political statement after Christmas, and pull them down in favour of your chosen party. Or, if you're like me, no party at all.
So a vote is on, and the outcome is essentially a foregone conclusion. Non-confidence in the reigning party will be confirmed, following the motion served last week by The Conservatives and NDP (Moved by Harper, seconded by Layton). The outcome is that with the non-confidence vote lost by the governing party, the Governor-General (the Queen's representative in Canada) will confer with the Prime Minister and in that process will call for a new election. The writ, as we say, will be dropped.
She, (the GG) can actually do something else if she wanted - she could say, "You conservatives, NDP's and Bloc's go form a new government." But that's very unlikely, and so we'll end up going to the polls in early January.
Voting on the non-confidence motion gets underway just before 7:00pm tonight, and doesn't take long, as members simply stand to be counted and then we know.
Phoning it in For the First Month
It's generally conceeded that the parties will not be going full tilt until after the Christmas season. There will be some token campaigning, but they anticipate a lot of doors closed in their faces leading up to the holidays, and so will wait until afterwards to start really pounding the pavement.
The first spins of the session will have to be seen. We still see the Liberals saying "Canadians don't want an election" Canadians generally don't seem to care much when it happens. The opposition parties point out that they'd like a non-confidence motion now, and an election later (with some governing going ahead for a month or so).
They have a point, I suppose - the Liberals - that once confidence has failed, the concept of continuing to legislate further business is a bit of a stretch to the parliametary system.
Enjoying the Machinations
So meanwhile, enjoy the steps as they play out. I think it's the best part of the system, steeped in tradition, no gunshots invoved or people lined up against garden walls. The PM should have a speech for the press shortly about his chat with the GG, there should be statements that punch the primary slogans and points of the respective campaigns, and lawn signs will start sprouting around town.
I'd recommend a sign from each of the Liberals and the Greens for your lawn - the colours will be particularly festive. You can worry about the political statement after Christmas, and pull them down in favour of your chosen party. Or, if you're like me, no party at all.
Sunday
There's an Election Looming - The Lay of the Land
It's late Novemeber, 2005 and there are moves afoot that will precipitate an election before long. The lay of the land is this: The ruling liberals are on record as saying they will call an election, around the March '06 time frame, based on the timing of a certain judicial review report (more on that later).
They are in a minority government position, one where the opposition parties can topple them with a non-confidence vote, but only if the other parties work together.
There is no single other party with which the governing liberals can cooperate to carry the house, and thus a simple coalition is not possible. Plus, while loose allignment with one of the opposing parties was enough to barely (ie by one vote) hold on to power, that has been dissolved. The numbers were just balanced insuch a way, back when non-confidence votes were being weilded a few months back, that the two together (Liberals and NDP) could, with the tie breaking vote of the speaker of the house, carry the day.
But it's not that simple, the NDP (New Democratic Party - they are not actually "New" at all) has proposed that something other than the usual non-confidence, bring-down-the-governement-type vote be introduced. They want to pass a vote to have an election at a specific time - in early January.
But that hasn't been done before, and the Liberals claim that it's not kosher. Either there is confidence in the Government or there isn't (Spin 1), they say. And Canadians do not want a Christmas Holidays election (Spin 2)
But "Hey-" say the NDP and the other two opposition parties, the Bloc and Conservatives, why can't we agree to dissolve the governement later, after these pieces of legislation you the governement are trying to complete, and we the opposition would like to see completed. (Spin 3)
This, to your humble citizen seems pretty good - politicians actually doing something, and finishing some work. Why can't we do that indeed.
DE-SPIN:
Spin 1: Either there's confidence or there isn't. This is governing party spin to actually say "We need to be seen having the election on our terms, and we want to force the election to be either a) called by us at our timing, to project a we're-in-control look... or we want the election forced at Christmas time so we can paint you with our Spin 2 Brush and make you all look bad.
Spin 2: The idea that "Canadians Don't want a Christmas Election" is total bunk. Canadians could care less. It takes 20 minutes or so to vote - no big deal. In fact, it gives Canadians a chance to talk about something beefy and convouted during the holidays when families and friends get together. In reality, if we thought about it more openly and in the media (don't get me started), Canadians would LOVE a Christmas election. Everyone votes, Christmas cookies around the fire, singing polically-re-written Christmas Carols, we all watch the returns with a glass of nog. It would be great fun.
But the Media is spinning this for the politicians, when in reality, the politicians do not want to campaign in the cold, don't want to disrupt their lavish Holiday lifestyle with some actual work. So while the opposition wants to avoid Xmas with their "Hey, lets get some work done" approach (see below), the Liberals want to avoid it with a "Hey, we'll blame this on you and it will hurt you in the polls" thing.
Spin 3: This is actually mostly Spin 2 all over again. The opposition parties can be painted with the same brush as the governing politicians. Nobody wants to work - let alone work hard over Christmas. If it happens, and it probably will, they will all look back at it happily because it will be a big bonding thing with egg-nog and warm furry sweaters and frost-bitten ears, and they'll call it the best days of their lives.
However, I actually like the spin idea that they should postpone till January, and actually pass some flippin' legislation so the country can move forward a bit before the next election blasts a whole in all government productivity.
Oh, the 'judicial review' thing - that's better known as the Gomery Report, an investigation or royal commission or some sort of review of the events around a big financial scandal in Quebec, where a raft of Quebec politicians and beaurocrats lined their buddies' pockets through improperly doled out contracts. This thing is SpinCity, and I'll talk more about it later.
Next Blogs - Watch for a weekly update, or even more often if the spirit (and events) move me to the keyboard
They are in a minority government position, one where the opposition parties can topple them with a non-confidence vote, but only if the other parties work together.
There is no single other party with which the governing liberals can cooperate to carry the house, and thus a simple coalition is not possible. Plus, while loose allignment with one of the opposing parties was enough to barely (ie by one vote) hold on to power, that has been dissolved. The numbers were just balanced insuch a way, back when non-confidence votes were being weilded a few months back, that the two together (Liberals and NDP) could, with the tie breaking vote of the speaker of the house, carry the day.
But it's not that simple, the NDP (New Democratic Party - they are not actually "New" at all) has proposed that something other than the usual non-confidence, bring-down-the-governement-type vote be introduced. They want to pass a vote to have an election at a specific time - in early January.
But that hasn't been done before, and the Liberals claim that it's not kosher. Either there is confidence in the Government or there isn't (Spin 1), they say. And Canadians do not want a Christmas Holidays election (Spin 2)
But "Hey-" say the NDP and the other two opposition parties, the Bloc and Conservatives, why can't we agree to dissolve the governement later, after these pieces of legislation you the governement are trying to complete, and we the opposition would like to see completed. (Spin 3)
This, to your humble citizen seems pretty good - politicians actually doing something, and finishing some work. Why can't we do that indeed.
DE-SPIN:
Spin 1: Either there's confidence or there isn't. This is governing party spin to actually say "We need to be seen having the election on our terms, and we want to force the election to be either a) called by us at our timing, to project a we're-in-control look... or we want the election forced at Christmas time so we can paint you with our Spin 2 Brush and make you all look bad.
Spin 2: The idea that "Canadians Don't want a Christmas Election" is total bunk. Canadians could care less. It takes 20 minutes or so to vote - no big deal. In fact, it gives Canadians a chance to talk about something beefy and convouted during the holidays when families and friends get together. In reality, if we thought about it more openly and in the media (don't get me started), Canadians would LOVE a Christmas election. Everyone votes, Christmas cookies around the fire, singing polically-re-written Christmas Carols, we all watch the returns with a glass of nog. It would be great fun.
But the Media is spinning this for the politicians, when in reality, the politicians do not want to campaign in the cold, don't want to disrupt their lavish Holiday lifestyle with some actual work. So while the opposition wants to avoid Xmas with their "Hey, lets get some work done" approach (see below), the Liberals want to avoid it with a "Hey, we'll blame this on you and it will hurt you in the polls" thing.
Spin 3: This is actually mostly Spin 2 all over again. The opposition parties can be painted with the same brush as the governing politicians. Nobody wants to work - let alone work hard over Christmas. If it happens, and it probably will, they will all look back at it happily because it will be a big bonding thing with egg-nog and warm furry sweaters and frost-bitten ears, and they'll call it the best days of their lives.
However, I actually like the spin idea that they should postpone till January, and actually pass some flippin' legislation so the country can move forward a bit before the next election blasts a whole in all government productivity.
Oh, the 'judicial review' thing - that's better known as the Gomery Report, an investigation or royal commission or some sort of review of the events around a big financial scandal in Quebec, where a raft of Quebec politicians and beaurocrats lined their buddies' pockets through improperly doled out contracts. This thing is SpinCity, and I'll talk more about it later.
Next Blogs - Watch for a weekly update, or even more often if the spirit (and events) move me to the keyboard
Monday
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)